of 


rnixif 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2007  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/completereligiouOOpainiala 


THOMAS  PAINE. 


THE  COMPLETE 


PELIGIOUS  AND  THEOLOGICAL 


WORKS. 


OF 


"THOMAS  PAINED, 


SHCHBTARY  TO  THE  COMMITTEE  OF  FOBEIQN  AFP  AIRS  IN  THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION, 
AND  AUTHOR  OF    '  '  COMMON  SENSE, ' '     '  'THE  CRISIS,  "    ''  RIGHT  OF  MAN,"  ETC. 


ILLUSTRATED  EDITION. 


New  York  t 
PETER  ECKLER,  PUBLISHER, 

35  Fulton  Street. 


CONTENTS. 

THE   AGE  OF  REASON.  pack 

Part    I. — Being  an  Investigation  of  True  and  Fabulous  Theology       5 
Part  II — Being  an  Investigation  ofTrue  and  Fabulous  Theology.    69 
Part  III. — Being  an    Examalion   of   the   Passages  in  the   New 
Testament  quoted  from  the  Old,  and  called  Prophe- 
cies of  the  coming  of  Jesus  Christ.  .  .        195 

The  Book  of  Mark 224 

The  Book  of  Luke.  .,.-..        228 

The  Book  of  John 230 

\  Contradictory  Do<5lriiies  in  the  New  Testament  between 

«  Matthew  and  Mark  250 

f  An  Essay  on  Dreams.  252 

I  ,  My  Private  Thoughts  on  a  Future  State.  .  .  261 
I  Part  IV. — A  Letter  to  the  Hon  Thomas  Erskine.  .  .  267 
Religious  Year  of  the  Theophilanthropists.  .  .  295 
S  Precise  History  of  the  Theophilanthropists.  .  .  296 
t  A  Discourse  Delivered  to  the  Society  of  Theophilanthro- 
pists at  Paris.                300 

A  Letter  to  Camille  Jordan.  .        •        .        .        .    310 

Origin  of  Free  Masonry.  321 

Extradl  from  a  Reply  to  the  Bishop  of  Llandaff         .    336 
On  the  names  of  the  Book  of  Genesis      .        .        .         345 

The  Book  of  Job.  349 

Sabbath  or  Sunday  • 355 

Future  State.  •        .        • 362 

Miracles.  363 

A  Letter,  being  an  Answer  to  a  friend  on  the  Publica- 
tion of  the  ^4^?-^  o/AVa.yo«.  ....    368 

Letter  to  Samuel  Adams. 373 

Letter  to  Andrew  A.  Dean. 380 

Remarks  on  Robert  Hall's  Sermons         .        .        .        384 

Of  the  Word  Religion 387 

Of  Cain  and  Abel. 391 

The  Tower  of  Babel. 393 

To  Members  of  the  Society  Styling  itself  the  Missionary 

Society.  395 

Of  the  Religion  of  Deism. 397 

The  Sabbath  Day  of  Connecticut 405 

Ancient  History. 407 

Bishop  Moore 412 

To  John  Mason. 416 

Of  the  Books  of  the  New  Testament.  .        .    421 

On  Deism  and  the  Writings  of  Thomas  Paine.        .        427 


-■-■4-- 


o 

O 

w 


AGE  OF  REASON, 


BEING  AN  INVESTIGATION  OP 


TRUE   AND    FABULOUS   THEOLOGY. 


THOMAS    PAINE, 

IBTABT  TO  THB  COHMITTKI  OF  POREIGIT  AFFAIRS  IN  THE  AXBBtCAN  RKTOLlTTrt 
AMD  AUTHOR  OF  "  OOMXOH  SUiBB,"  "  TUK  CmsiS,"  "  JUQUT8  OF  MAN,"  BTO. 


IK    TWO   PARTS. 


PART  I. 


New  York: 

PETER  ECKLER.  PUBLISHER, 

j5  FuLfON  Street. 


TO   MY   FELLOW   CITIZENS   OF  THE 
UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA. 


1PUT  the  following  work  under  your  protection.  It 
contains  my  opinion  upon  religion.  You  will  do  me 
the  justice  to  remember,  that  I  have  always  strenu- 
ously supported  the  right  of  every  man  to  his  opinion, 
however  different  that  opinion  might  be  to  mine.  He 
who  denies  to  another  this  right,  makes  a  slave  of  him- 
self to  his  present  opinion,  because  he  precludes  himself 
the  right  of  changing  it. 

The  most  formidable  weapon  against  errors  of  every 
kind  is  reason.  I  have  never  used  any  other,  and  I  trust 
I  never  shall. 

Your  affectionate  friend  and  fellow-citizen, 

THOMAS  PAINE, 

Luxembourg  {Paris),  8th  Pluvdise. 
Second  year  of  the  French  Republic,  one  and  indivisible. 
January  zjth,  O.  S.  1794. 


AGE  OF  REASON. 


PART  FIRST. 

IT  has  been  my  intention,  for  several  years  past,  to  pub- 
lish my  thoughts  upon  religion.  I  am  well  aware  of 
the  difficulties  that  attend  the  subject,  and  from  that 
consideration,  had  reserved  it  to  a  more  advanced  period 
of  life.  I  intended  it  to  be  the  last  offering  I  should 
make  to  my  fell  :)w-citizens  of  all  nations,  and  that  at  a 
time  when  the  purity  of  the  motive  that  induced  me  to 
it,  could  not  admit  of  a  question,  even  by  those  who 
might  disapprove  the  work. 

The  circumstance  that  has  now  taken  place  in  France 
of  the  total  abolition  of  the  whole  national  order  of  priest- 
hood, and  of  everything  appertaining  to  compulsive  sys- 
tems of  religion,  and  compulsive  articles  of  faith,  has  not 
only  precipitated  my  intention,  but  rendered  a  work  of 
this  kind  exceedingly  necessary,  lest  in  the  general 
wreck  of  superstition,  of  false  systems  of  government, 
and  false  theology,  we  lose  sight  of  morality,  of  human- 
ity, and  of  the  theology  that  is  true. 

As  several  of  my  colleagues,  and  others  of  my  fellow- 
citizens  of  France,  have  given  me  the  example  of  making 
their  voluntary  and  individual  profession  of  faith,  I  also 
will  make  mine  ;  and  I  do  this  with  all  that  sincerity  and 
frankness  with  which  the  mind  of  man  communicates 
with  itself. 

I  believe  in  one  God,  and  no  more  ;  and  I  hope  for 
happiness  beyond  this  life. 


6  AGE   OF   REASON. 

I  believe  in  the  equality  of  man  ;  and  I  believe  that 
religious  duties  consist  in  doing  justice,  loving  mercy, 
and  endeavoring  to  make  our  fellow-creatures  happy. 

But,  lest  it  should  be  supposed  that  I  believe  many 
other  things  in  addition  to  these,  I  shall,  in  the  progress 
of  this  work,  declare  the  things  I  do  not  believe,  and  my 
reasons  for  not  believing  them. 

I  do  not  believe  in  the  creed  professed  by  the  Jewish 
church,  by  the  Roman  church,  by  the  Greek  church,  by 
the  Turkish  church,  by  the  Protestant  church,  nor  by 
any  church  that  I  know  of.  My  own  mind  is  my  own 
church. 

All  national  institutious  of  churches,  whether  Jewish, 
Christian  or  Turkish,  appear  to  me  no  other  than  human 
inventions,  set  up  to  terrify  and  enslave  mankind,  and 
monopolize  power  and  profit. 

I  do  not  mean  by  this  declaration  to  condemn  those  who 
believe  otherwise;  they  have  the  same  right  to  their  belief 
as  I  have  to  miue.  But  it  is  necessary  to  the  happiness 
of  man,  that  he  be  mentally  faithful  to  liimself.  Infidelity 
does  not  consist  in  believing,  or  in  disbelieving;  it  con- 
sists in  professing  to  believe  what  he  does  not  believe. 

It  is  impossible  to  calculate  the  moral  mischief,  if  I  may 
so  express  it,  that  mental  lying  has  produced  in  society. 
V/hen  a  man  has  so  far  corrupted  and  prostituted  the 
chastity  of  his  mind,  as  to  subscribe  his  professional  belief 
to  things  he  docs  not  believe,  he  has  prepared  himself  for 
the  commission  of  every  other  crime.  He  takes  up  the 
trade  of  a  priest  for  the  sake  of  gain,  and  in  order  to  qual- 
ify himself  for  that  trade,  he  begins  with  a  perjur}'.  Can 
we  conceive  any  thing  more  destructive  to  morality  than 
this? 

Soon  after  I  had  published  the  pamphlet  Common  Sense, 
in  America,  I  saw  the  exceeding  probability  that  a  revo- 
lution in  the  system  of  government  would  be  followed  by 
a  revolution  in  the  system  of  religion.     The  adulterous 


AGE  OF    REASON.  7 

connection  of  church  and  state,  wherever  it  had  taken 
place,  whether  Jewish,  Christian,  or  Turkish,  had  so 
effectually  prohibited  by  pains  and  penalties,  every  dis- 
cussion upon  established  creeds,  and  upon  first  principles 
of  religion,  that  until  the  system  of  government  should 
be  changed,  those  subjects  could  not  be  brought  fairly 
and  openly  before  the  world  ;  but  that  whenever  this 
should  be  done,  a  revolution  in  the  system  of  religion 
would  follow.  Human  inventions  and  priestcraft  would 
be  detected  ;  and  man  would  return  to  the  pure,  unmixed 
and  unadulterated  belief  of  one  God,  and  no  more. 

Every  national  church  or  religion  has  established  itself 
by  pretending  some  special  mission  from  God,  commu- 
nicated to  certain  individuals.  The  Jews  have  their 
Moses ;  the  Christians  their  Jesus  Christ,  their  apostles 
and  saints  ;  and  the  Turks  their  Mahomet,  as  if  the  way 
to  God  was  not  oj)en  to  every  man  alike. 

Each  of  those  churches  show  certain  books,  which  they 
call  revelation^  or  the  word  of  God.  The  Jews  say,  that 
their  word  of  God  was  given  by  God  to  Moses,  face  to 
face  ;  the  Christians  say,  that  their  word  of  God  came  by 
divine  inspiration  :  and  the  Turks  say,  that  their  word  of 
God  (the  Koran)  was  brought  by  an  angel  from  Heaven. 
Each  of  those  churches  accuse  the  other  of  unbelief;  and 
for  my  own  part,  I  disbelieve  them  all. 

As  it  is  necessary  to  affix  right  ideas  to  words,  I  will, 
before  I  proceed  further  into  the  subject,  offer  some  other 
observations  on  the  word  revelation.  Revelation,  when 
applied  to  religion,  means  something  communicated  itn^ 
mediately  from  God  to  man. 

No  one  will  deny  or  dispute  the  power  of  the  Almighty 
to  make  such  a  communication,  if  he  pleases.  But 
admitting,  for  the  sake  of  a  case,  that  something  has 
been  revealed  to  a  certain  person,  and  not  revealed  to 
any  other  person,  it  is  revelation  to  that  person  only. 
When  he  ♦^ells  it  to  a  second  person,  a  second  to  a  third, 


8  AGE   OF   REASON. 

a  third  to  a  fourth,  and  so  on,  it  ceases  to  be  a  revelation 
to  all  those  persons.  It  is  revelation  to  the  first  person 
only,  and  Jtearsay  to  every  other,  and  consequently  they 
are  not  obliged  to  believe  it. 

It  is  a  contradiction  in  terms  and  ideas,  to  call  any- 
thing a  revelation  that  comes  to  us  at  second-hand,  either 
verbally  or  in  writing.  Revelation  is  necessarily  limited 
to  the  first  communication — after  this,  it  is  only  an 
account  of  something  which  that  person  says  was  a  reve- 
lation made  to  him  ;  and  though  he  may  find  himself 
obliged  to  believe  it,  it  cannot  be  incumbent  on  me  to 
believe  it  in  the  same  manner  ;  for  it  was  not  a  revela- 
tion made  to  me^  and  I  have  only  his  word  for  it  that  it 
was  made  to  him. 

When  Moses  told  the  children  of  Israel  that  he  received 
the  two  tables  of  the  commandments  from  the  hands  of 
God,  they  were  not  obliged  to  believe  him,  because  they 
had  no  other  authority  for  it  than  his  telling  them  so ; 
and  I  have  no  other  authority  for  it  than  some  historian 
telling  me  so.  The  commandments  carry  no  internal 
evidence  of  divinity  with  them  ;  they  contain  some  good 
moral  precepts,  such  as  any  man  qualified  to  be  a  law- 
giver, or  a  legislator,  could  produce  himself,  without 
having  recourse  to  supernatural  intervention.  * 

When  I  am  told  that  the  Koran  was  written  in  Heaven 
and  brought  to  Mahomet  by  an  angel,  the  account  comes 
too  near  the  same  kind  of  hearsay  evidence  and  second- 
hand authority  as  the  former.  I  did  not  see  the  angel 
myself,  and,  therefore,  I  have  a  right  not  to  believe  it. 

When  also  I  am  told  that  a  woman  called  the  Virgin 
Mary,  said,  or  gave  out,  that  she  was  with  child  without 
any  cohabitation  with  a  man,  and  that  her  betrothed  hus- 
band, Joseph,  said  that  an  angel  told  him  so,  I  have  a 
right  to  believe  them  or  not ;  such  a  circumstance  re- 

*  It  is,  however,  necessary  to  except  the  declaration  which  says  that  God  visiti  th* 
tins  of  the  falhtrs  upon  the  children  ;  it  is  contrary  to  every  principle  of  moral  justice. 


AGE  OP  REASON.  9 

quired  a  much  stronger  evidence  than  their  bare  word  for 
it ;  but  we  have  not  even  this — for  neither  Joseph  nor 
Mary  wrote  any  such  matter  themselves  ;  it  is  only  re- 
ported by  others  that  they  said  so — it  is  hearsay  upon 
hearsay,  and  I  do  not  choose  to  rest  my  belief  upon  such 
evidence. 

It  is,  however,  not  difficult  to  account  for  the  credit 
that  was  given  to  the  story  of  Jesus  Christ  being  the  son 
of  God.  He  was  bom  when  the  heathen  mythology  had 
still  some  fashion  and  repute  in  the  world,  and  that  my- 
thology had  prepared  the  people  for  the  belief  of  such  a 
story.  Almost  all  the  extraordinary  men  that  lived  un- 
der the  heathen  mythology  were  reputed  to  be  the  sons 
of  some  of  their  gods.  It  was  not  a  new  thing,  at  that 
time,  to  believe  a  man  to  have  been  celestially  begotten ; 
the  intercourse  of  gods  with  women  was  then  a  matter  of 
familiar  opinion.  Their  Jupiter,  according  to  their  ac- 
counts, had  cohabited  with  hundreds  :  the  story,  there- 
fore, had  nothing  in  it  either  new,  wonderful,  or  obscene ; 
it  was  conformable  to  the  opinions  that  then  prevailed 
among  the  people  called  Gentiles,  or  Mythologists,  and 
it  was  those  people  only  that  believed  it.  The  Jews  who 
had  kept  strictly  to  the  belief  of  one  God,  and  no  more, 
and  who  had  always  rejected  the  heathen  mythology, 
never  credited  the  story. 

It  is  curious  to  observe  how  the  theory  of  what  is  called 
the  Christian  church  sprung  out  of  the  tail  of  the  heathen 
mytholog>'.  A  direct  incorporation  took  place  in  the 
first  instance,  by  making  the  reputed  founder  to  be  ce- 
lestially begotten.  The  trinity  of  gods  that  then  followed 
was  no  other  than  a  reduction  of  the  former  plurality, 
which  was  about  twenty  or  thirty  thousand  :  the  statue 
of  Mary  succeeded  the  statue  of  Diana  of  Ephesus  ;  the 
deification  of  heroes  changed  into  the  canonization  of 
saints  ;  the  Mythologists  had  gods  for  everything  ;  the 
Christian    Mythologists  had  saints  for  everything  ;  the 


lO  AGE   OF   REASON. 

church  became  as  crowded  with  one,  as  the  Pantheon 
had  been  with  the  other,  and  Rome  was  the  place  of  both. 
The  Christian  theory  is  little  else  than  the  idolatry  of 
the  ancient  Mythologists,  accommodated  to  the  purposes 
of  power  and  revenue  ;  and  it  yet  remains  to  reason  and 
philosophy  to  abolish  the  amphibious  fraud. 

Nothing  that  is  here  said  can  apply,  even  with  the 
most  distant  disrespect,  to  the  real  character  of  Jesus 
Christ.  He  was  a  virtuous  and  an  amiable  man.  The 
morality  that  he  preached  and  practised  was  of  the  most 
benevolent  kind  ;  and  though  similar  systems  of  morality 
had  been  preached  by  Confucius,  and  by  some  of  the 
Greek  philosophers,  many  years  before  ;  by  the  Quakers 
since  ;  and  by  many  good  men  in  all  ages,  it  has  not 
been  exceeded  by  any. 

Jesus  Christ  wrote  no  account  of  himself,  of  his  birth, 
parentage,  or  any  thing  else  ;  not  a  line  of  what  is  called 
the  New  Testament  is  of  his  own  writing.  The  history 
of  him  is  altogether  the  work  of  other  people  ;  and  as  to 
the  account  given  of  his  resurrection  and  ascension,  it 
was  the  necessary  counterpart  to  the  story  of  his  birth. 
His  historians  having  brought  him  into  the  world  in  a 
supernatural  manner,  were  obliged  to  take  him  out  again 
in  the  same  manner,  or  the  first  part  of  the  story  must 
have  fallen  to  the  ground. 

The  wretched  contrivance  with  which  this  latter  part 
is  told  exceeds  every  thing  that  went  before  it.  The  first 
part,  that  of  the  miraculous  conception,  was  not  a  thing 
that  admitted  of  publicity  ;  and  therefore  the  tellers  of 
this  part  of  the  story  had  this  advantage,  that  though 
they  might  not  be  credited,  they  could  not  be  detected. 
They  could  not  be  expected  to  prove  it,  because  it  was 
not  one  of  those  things  that  admitted  of  proof,  and  it  was 
impossible  that  the  person  of  whom  it  was  told  could 
prove  it  himself. 

But  the  resurrection  of  a  dead  person  from  the  grave. 


AGE  OF   REASON.  11 

and  his  ascension  through  the  air,  is  a  thing  very  differ- 
ent as  to  the  evidence  it  admits  of,  to  the  invisible 
conception  of  a  child  in  the  womb.  The  resurrection  and 
ascension,  supposing  them  to  have  taken  place,  admitted 
of  public  and  ocular  demonstration,  like  that  of  the  as- 
cension of  a  balloon,  or  the  sun  at  noon-day,  to  all  Jeru- 
salem at  least.  A  thing  which  everybody  is  required  to 
believe,  requires  that  the  proof  and  evidence  of  it  should 
be  equal  to  all,  and  universal ;  and  as  the  public  visibility 
of  this  last  related  act  was  the  only  evidence  that  could 
give  sanction  to  the  former  part,  the  whole  of  it  falls  to 
the  ground,  because  that  evidence  never  was  given.  In. 
stead  of  this,  a  small  number  of  persons,  not  more  than 
eight  or  nine,  are  introduced  as  proxies  for  the  whole 
world,  to  say  they  saw  it,  and  all  the  rest  of  the  world 
are  called  upon  to  believe  it.  But  it  appears  that  Thomas 
did  not  believe  the  resurrection,  and,  as  they  say,  would 
not  believe  without  having  ocular  and  manual  demonstra- 
tion himself.  So  neither  will'I^  and  the  reason  is  equally 
as  good  for  me,  and  for  every  other  person,  as  for  Thomas. 
It  is  in  vain  to  attempt  to  palliate  or  disguise  this 
matter.  The  story,  so  far  as  relates  to  the  supernatural 
part,  has  every  mark  of  fraud  and  imposition  stamped 
upon  the  face  of  it.  Who  were  the  authors  of  it  is  as 
impossible  for  us  now  to  know,  as  it  is  for  us  to  be  as- 
sured that  the  books  in  which  the  account  is  related 
were  written  by  the  persons  whose  names  they  bear  ;  the 
best  surviving  evidence  we  now  have  respecting  this 
affair  is  the  Jews.  They  are  regularly  descended  from 
the  people  who  lived  in  the  times  this  resurrection  and 
ascension  is  said  to  have  happened,  and  they  say,  it  is  not 
true.  It  has  long  appeared  to  me  a  strange  inconsistency 
to  cite  the  Jews  as  a  proof  of  the  truth  of  the  story.  It 
is  just  the  same  as  if  a  man  were  to  say,  I  will  prove  the 
truth  of  what  I  have  told  you  by  producing  the  people 
who  say  it  is  false. 


12  AGE  OF   REASON. 

That  such  a  peison  as  Jesus  Christ  existed,  and  that 
he  was  crucified,  which  was  the  mode  of  execution  at 
that  day,  are  historical  relations  strictly  within  the  limits 
of  probability.  He  preached  most  excellent  morality 
and  the  equality  of  man  ;  but  he  preached  also  against 
the  corruptions  and  avarice  of  the  Jewish  priests,  and 
this  brought  upon  him  the  hatred  and  vengeance  of  the 
whole  order  of  priesthood.  The  accusation  which  those 
priests  brought  against  him  was  that  of  sedition  and  con- 
spiracy against  the  Roman  government,  to  which  the 
Jews  were  then  subject  and  tributary ;  and  it  is  not  im- 
probable that  the  Roman  government  might  have  some 
secret  apprehensions  of  the  effects  of  his  doctrine,  as  well 
as  the  Jewish  priests  ;  neither  is  it  improbable  that  Jesus 
Christ  had  in  contemplation  the  delivery  of  the  Jewish 
nation  from  the  bondage  of  the  Romans.  Between  the 
two,  however,  this  virtuous  reformer  and  revolutionist 
lost  his  life. 

It  is  upon  this  plain  narrative  of  facts,  together  with 
another  case  I  am  going  to  mention,  that  the  Christian 
Mythologists,  calling  themselves  the  Christian  Church, 
have  erected  their  fable,  which,  for  absurdity  and  ex- 
travagance, is  not  exceeded  by  anything  that  is  to  be 
found  in  the  mythology  of  the  ancients. 

The  ancient  Mythologists  tell  us  that  the  race  of 
Giants  made  war  against  Jupiter,  and  that  one  of  them 
threw  a  hundred  rocks  against  him  at  one  throw ;  that 
Jupiter  defeated  him  with  thunder,  and  confined  him 
afterward  under  Mount  Etna,  and  that  every  time  the 
Giant  turns  himself  Mount  Etna  belches  fire. 

It  is  here  easy  to  see  that  the  circumstance  of  the 
mountain,  that  of  its  being  a  volcano,  suggested  the  idea 
of  the  fable  ;  and  that  the  fable  is  made  to  fit  and  wind 
itself  up  with  that  circumstance. 

The  Christian  Mythologists  tell  us  that  their  Satai 
made  war  against  the  Almighty,  who  defeated  him,  anc 


AGE   OF    REASON.  13 

confined  him  afterward,  not  under  a  mountain,  but  in  a 
pit.  It  is  here  easy  to  see  that  the  first  fable  suggested 
the  idea  of  the  second  ;  for  the  fable  of  Jupiter  and  the 
Giants  was  told  many  hundred  years  before  that  of  Satan. 

Thus  far  the  ancient  and  the  Christian  Mythologists 
difier  very  little  from  each  other.  But  the  latter  have 
contrived  to  carry  the  matter  much  farther.  They  have 
contrived  to  connect  the  fabulous  part  of  the  story  of 
Jesus  Christ  with  the  fable  orgina ting  from  Mount  Etna  ; 
and  in  order  to  make  all  the  parts  of  the  story  tie  together, 
they  have  taken  to  their  aid  the  traditions  of  the  Jews  ;  for 
the  Christian  mythology  is  made  up  partly  from  the  an- 
cient mythology  and  partly  from  the  Jewish  traditions. 

The  Christian  Mythologists,  after  having  confined 
Satan  in  a  pit,  were  obliged  to  let  him  out  again  to  bring 
on  the  sequel  of  the  fable.  He  is  then  introduced  into 
the  Garden  of  Eden,  in  the  shape  of  a  snake  or  a  serpent, 
and  in  that  shape  he  enters  into  familiar  conversation 
with  Eve,  who  is  no  way  surprised  to  hear  a  snake  talk; 
and  the  issue  of  this  Ute-d.-tite  is  that  he  persuades  her 
to  eat  an  apple,  and  the  eating  of  that  apple  damns  all 
mankind. 

After  giving  Satan  this  triumph  over  the  whole  creation, 
one  would  have  supposed  that  the  Church  Mythologists 
would  have  been  kind  enough  to  send  him  back  again 
to  the  pit  ;  or,  if  they  had  not  done  this,  that  they  would 
have  put  a  mountain  upon  him  (for  they  say  that  their 
faith  can  remove  a  mountain),  or  have  put  him  under  a. 
mountain,  as  the  former  mythologists  had  done,  to  pre- 
vent his  getting  again  among  the  women  and  doing 
more  mischief.  But  instead  of  this  they  leave  him  at 
large,  without  even  obliging  him  to  give  his  parole  —  the 
secret  of  which  is,  that  they  could  not  do  without  him  ; 
and  after  being  at  the  trouble  of  making  him,  they 
bribed  him  to  stay.  They  promised  hitn  all  the  Jews, 
ALL  the  Turks  by  anticipation,  nine-tenths  of  the  world 


14  AGE   OF   REASON. 

beside,  and  Mahomet  into  the  bargain.  After  this,  who 
can  doubt  the  bountifulness  of  the  Christian  Mythology? 

Having  thus  made  an  insurrection  and  a  battle  in 
Heaven,  in  which  none  of  the  combatants  could  be  either 
killed  or  wounded — put  Satan  into  the  pit — let  him  out 
again — giving  him  a  triumph  over  the  whole  creation — 
damned  all  mankind  by  the  eating  of  an  apple,  these 
Christian  Mythologists  bring  the  two  ends  of  their  fable 
together.  They  represent  this  virtuous  and  amiable  man, 
Jesus  Christ,  to  be  at  once  both  God  and  Man,  and  also 
the  Son  of  God,  celestially  begotten,  on  purpose  to  be 
sacrificed,  because  they  say  that  Eve  in  her  longing  had 
eaten  an  apple. 

Putting  aside  everything  that  might  excite  laughter 
by  its  absurdity,  or  detestation  by  its  profaneness,  and 
confining  ourselves  merely  to  an  examination  of  the 
parts,  it  is  impossible  to  conceive  a  story  more  derogatory 
to  the  Almighty,  more  inconsistent  with  his  wisdom, 
more  contradictory  to  his  power,  than  this  story  is. 

In  order  to  make  for  it  a  foundation  to  rise  upon,  the 
inventors  were  under  the  necessity  of  giving  to  the  being 
whom  they  call  Satan,  a  power  equally  as  great,  if  not 
greater  than  they  attribute  to  the  Almighty.  They  have 
not  only  given  him  the  power  of  liberating  himself  from 
the  pit,  after  what  they  call  his  fall,  but  they  have  made 
that  power  increase  afterward  to  infinity.  Before  this 
fall  they  represent  him  only  as  an  angel  of  limited  exist- 
ence, as  they  represent  the  rest.  After  his  fall,  he 
becomes,  by  their  account,  omnipresent.  He  exists 
ever^'where,  and  at  the  same  time.  He  occupies  the 
whole  immensity  of  space. 

Not  content  with  this  deification  of  Satan,  they  repre- 
sent him  as  defeating,  by  stratagem,  in  the  shape  of  an 
animal  of  the  creation,  all  the  power  and  wisdom  of  the 
Almighty.  They  represent  him  as  having  compelled 
the  Almighty  to  the  direct  necessity  either  of  surren- 


AGS  OP  RBASON.  15 

dering  the  whole  of  the  creation  to  the  government  and 
sovereignty  of  this  Satan,  or  of  capitulating  for  its  re- 
demption by  coming  down  upon  earth,  and  exhibiting 
himself  upon  a  cross  in  the  shape  of  a  man. 

Had  the  inventors  of  this  story  told  it  the  contrary 
way,  that  is,  had  they  represented  the  Almighty  as  com- 
pelling Satan  to  exhibit  himself  on  a  cross,  in  the  shape 
of  a  snake,  as  a  punishment  for  his  new  transgression, 
the  story  would  have  been  less  absurd — less  contradic- 
tory. But  instead  of  this,  they  make  the  transgressor 
triumph,  and  the  Almighty  fall. 

That  mauy  good  men  have  believed  this  strange  fable, 
and  lived  very  good  lives  under  that  belief  (for  credulity 
is  not  a  crime),  is  what  I  have  no  doubt  of.  In  the  first 
place,  they  were  educated  to  believe  it,  and  they  would 
have  believed  anything  else  in  the  same  manner.  There 
are  also  many  who  have  been  so  enthusiastically  enrap- 
tured by  what  they  conceived  to  be  the  infinite  love  of 
God  to  man,  in  making  a  sacrifice  of  himself,  that  the 
vehemence  of  the  idea  has  forbidden  and  deterred  them 
from  examining  into  the  absurdity  and  profaneness  of  the 
story.  The  more  unnatural  anything  is,  the  more  it  is 
capable  of  becoming  the  object  of  dismal  admiration. 

But  if  objects  for  gratitude  and  admiration  are  our  de- 
sire, do  they  not  present  themselves  every  hour  to  our 
eyes  ?  Do  we  not  see  a  fair  creation  prepared  to  receive 
us  the  instant  we  are  bom — a  world  furnished  to  our 
hands,  that  cost  us  nothing?  Is  it  we  that  light  up  the 
sun,  that  pour  down  the  rain,  and  fill  the  earth  with 
abundance?  Whether  we  sleep  or  wake,  the  vast  ma- 
chinery of  the  universe  still  goes  on.  Are  these  things, 
and  the  blessings  they  indicate  in  future,  nothing  to  us? 
Can  our  gross  feelings  be  excited  by  no  other  subjects 
than  tragedy  and  suicide?  Or  is  the  gloomy  pride  of 
man  become  so  intolerable,  that  nothing  can  flatter  it 
but  a  sacrifice  of  the  Creator  ? 


l6  AGE   OF   REASON. 

I  know  that  this  bold  investigation  will  alarm  many, 
but  it  would  be  paying  too  great  a  compliment  to  their 
credulity  to  forbear  it  on  their  account ;  the  times  and 
the  subject  demand  it  to  be  done.  The  suspicion  that 
the  theory  of  what  is  called  the  Christian  Church  is  fab- 
ulous is  becoming  very  extensive  in  all  countries  ;  and  it 
will  be  a  consolation  to  men  staggering  under  that  sus- 
picion, and  doubting  what  to  believe  and  what  to  dis- 
believe, to  see  the  object  freely  investigated*.  I  therefore 
pass  on  to  an  examination  of  the  books  called  the  Old 
and  New  Testament. 

These  books,  beginning  with  Genesis  and  ending  with 
Revelation  (which,  by  the  by,  is  a  book  of  riddles  that 
requires  a  revelation  to  explain  it),  are,  we  are  told,  the 
word  of  God.  It  is,  therefore,  proper  for  us  to  know 
who  told  us  so,  that  we  may  know  what  credit  to  give  to 
the  report.  The  answer  to  this  question  is,  that  nobody 
can  tell,  except  that  we  tell  one  another  so.  The  case, 
however,  historically  appears  to  be  as  follows  : 

When  the  Church  Mythologists  established  their  sys- 
tem, they  collected  all  the  writings  they  could  find,  and 
managed  them  as  they  pleased.  It  is  a  matter  altogether 
of  uncertainty  to  us  whether  such  of  the  writings  as  now 
appear  under  the  name  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament 
are  in  the  same  state  in  which  those  collectors  say  they 
found  them,  or  whether  they  added,  altered,  abridged, 
or  dressed  them  up. 

Be  this  as  it  may,  they  decided  by  vote  which  of  the 
books  out  of  the  collection  they  had  made  should  be  the 
WORD  OF  God,  and  which  should  not.  They  rejected 
several  ;  they  voted  others  to  be  doubtful,  such  as  the 
books  called  the  Apocrypha  ;  and  those  books  which  had 
a  majority  of  votes,  were  voted  to  be  the  word  of  God. 
Had  they  voted  otherwise,  all  the  people,  since  calling 
themselves  Christians,  had  believed  otherwise — for  the 
belief  of  the  one  comes  from  the  vote  of  the  other.    Who 


AGE  OF   REASON.  I7 

the  people  were  that  did  all  this,  we  know  nothing  of ; 
they  called  themselves  by  the  general  name  of  the 
Church,  and  this  is  all  we  know  of  the  matter. 

As  we  have  no  other  external  evidence  or  authority 
for  believing  these  books  to  be  the  word  of  God  than 
what  I  have  mentioned,  which  is  no  evidence  or  au- 
thority at  all,  I  come,  in  the  next  place,  to  examine  the 
internal  evidence  contained  in  the  books  themselves. 

In  the  former  part  of  this  Essay,  I  have  spoken  of 
revelation  ;  I  now  proceed  further  with  that  subject,  for 
the  purpose  of  applying  it  to  the  books  in  question. 

Revelation  is  a  communication  of  something  which 
the  person  to  whom  tliat  thing  is  revealed  did  not  know 
before.  For  if  I  have  done  a  thing,  or  seen  it  done,  it 
needs  no  revelation  to  tell  me  I  have  done  it,  or  seen  it, 
nor  to  enable  me  to  tell  it,  or  to  write  it. 

Revelation,  th.erefore,  cannot  be  applied  to  anything 
done  upon  earth,  of  which  man  himself  is  the  actor  or 
the  witness  ;  and  consequently  all  the  historical  and  an- 
ecdotal parts  of  the  Bible,  which  is  almost  the  whole  of 
it,  is  not  within  the  meaning  8nd  compass  of  the  word 
revelation,  and,  therefore,  is  not  the  word  of  God. 

When  Samson  ran  off  with  the  gate-posts  of  Gaza,  if 
he  ever  did  so  (and  whether  he  did  or  not  is  nothing  to 
us),  or  when  he  visited  his  Delilah,  or  caught  his  foxes, 
or  did  any  thing  else,  what  has  revelation  to  do  with 
these  things?  If  they  were  facts,  he  could  tell  them 
himself,  or  his  secretary,  if  he  kept  one,  could  write 
them,  if  they  were  worth  either  telling  or  writing  ;  and 
if  they  were  fictions,  revelation  could  not  make  them 
true  ;  and  whether  true  or  not,  we  are  neither  the  better 
nor  the  wiser  for  knowing  them.  When  we  contemplate 
the  immensity  of  that  Being  who  directs  and  governs  the 
incomprehensible  whole,  of  which  the  utmost  ken  of 
human  sight  can  discover  but  a  part,  we  ought  to  feel 
shame  at  calling  such  paltry  stories  the  word  of  God. 


l8  AGE  OF  REASON. 

As  to  the  account  of  the  Creation,  with  which  the 
Book  of  Genesis  opens,  it  has  all  the  appearance  of  being 
a  tradition  which  the  Israelites  had  among  them  before 
they  came  into  Eg}'pt ;  and  after  their  departure  from 
that  country  they  put  it  at  the  head  of  their  history, 
without  telling  (as  it  is  most  probable)  that  they  did  not 
inow  how  they  came  by  it.  The  manner  in  which  the 
account  opens  shows  it  to  be  traditionary.  It  begins 
abruptly  ;  it  is  nobody  that  speaks ;  it  is  nobody  that 
hears  ;  it  is  addressed  to  nobody  ;  it  has  neither  first, 
second,  nor  third  person  ;  it  has  every  criterion  of  being 
a  tradition  ;  it  has  no  voucher.  Moses  does  not  take  it 
upon  himself  by  introducing  it  with  the  formality  that 
lie  uses  on  other  occasions,  such  as  that  of  saying,  "  The 
Lord  spake  unto  Moses^  saying. ' ' 

Why  it  has  been  called  the  Mosaic  account  of  the 
Creation,  I  am  at  a  loss  to  conceive.  Moses,  I  believe, 
was  too  good  a  judge  of  such  subjects  to  put  his  name 
to  that  account.  He  had  been  educated  among  the 
Bgyptians,  who  were  a  people  as  well  skilled  in  science, 
and  particularly  in  astronomy,  as  any  people  of  their 
day  ;  and  the  silence  and  caution  that  Moses  observes 
in  not  authenticating  the  account,  is  a  good  negative 
evidence  that  he  neither  told  it  nor  believed  it.  The  case 
is,  that  ever>'  nation  of  people  has  been  world-makers, 
and  the  Israelites  had  as  much  right  to  set  up  the  trade  of 
world-making  as  any  of  the  rest ;  and  as  Moses  was  not  an 
Israelite,  he  might  not  choose  to  contradict  the  tradition. 
The  account,  however,  is  harmless  ;  and  this  is  more  than 
can  be  said  of  many  other  parts  of  the  Bible. 

Whenever  we  read  the  obscene  stories,  the  voluptuous 
debaucheries,  the  cruel  and  torturous  executions,  the  un- 
relenting vindictiveness,  with  which  more  than  half  the 
Bible  is  filled,  it  would  be  more  consistent  that  we 
called  it  the  word  of  a  demon,  than  the  word  of  God.  It 
is  a  history  of  wickedness,  that  has  served  to  corrupt  and 


AGS  OP   REASON.  I9 

brutalize  mankind  ;  and,  for  my  part,  I  sincerely  detest 
it,  as  I  detest  everything  that  is  cruel. 

We  scarcely  meet  with  anything,  a  few  phrases  ex- 
cepted, but  what  deserves  either  our  abhorrence  or  our 
contempt,  till  we  come  to  the  miscellaneous  parts  of  the 
Bible.  In  the  anonymous  publications,  the  Psalms,  and 
the  Book  of  Job,  more  particularly  in  the  latter,  we  find 
a  great  deal  of  elevated  sentiment  reverentially  expressed 
of  the  power  and  benignity  of  the  Almighty  ;  but  they 
stand  on  no  higher  rank  than  many  other  compositions 
on  similar  subjects,  as  well  before  that  time  as  since. 

The  Proverbs  which  are  said  to  be  Solomon's,  though 
most  probably  a  collection  (because  they  discover  a 
knowledge  of  life  which  his  situation  excluded  him  from 
knowing),  are  an  instructive  table  of  ethics.  They  are 
inferior  in  keenness  to  the  proverbs  of  the  Spaniards,  and 
not  more  wise  and  economical  than  those  of  the  Ameri- 
can Franklin. 

All  the  remaining  parts  of  the  Bible,  generally  known 
by  the  name  of  the  Prophets,  are  the  works  of  the  Jewish 
poets  and  itinerant  preachers,  who  mixed  poetry,*  anec- 

•As  there  aie  many  readers  who  do  not  see  that  a  composition  is  poetry  unless  it  be 
In  rhyme,  it  is  for  their  information  that  I  add  this  note 

Poetry  consists  principally  in  two  things— imagery  and  composition.  The  composi- 
tion of  poftr>"  differs  from  that  of  prose  in  the  manner  of  mixing  long  and  short  sylla- 
ble's together.  Take  a  long  syllable  out  of  a  line  of  poetry,  and  put  a  short  one  in  ihe 
room  of  it.  or  put  a  lung  syllable  where  a  shoHone  should  be,  and  that  line  will  lose  its 
poetical  harmony.  It  will  have  an  effect  upon  the  line  like  that  uf  misplacing  a  note 
ill  a  song.  The  imagery  iu  these  books,  callt-d  the  Prophets,  appertains  altogether 
to  po<-tr>'.  It  is  fictitious,  and  oiteii  cxtrnvagant,  and  not  admissible  in  any  other 
kindof  writing  than  poetry  To  show  that  these  writings  are  composed  in  poetical 
numbers.  I  will  lake  ten  syllables,  as  they  stand  in  the  book,  and  make  a  line  of  the 
same  number  of  syllables,  (heroic  measure)  that  shall  rhyme  with  the  last  word.  It 
will  then  be  seen  that  the  com;>ositioii  of  these  books  is  poetical  measure.  The  in- 
stance I  shall  produce  is  from  Isaiah  : 

"  Hfar,  O ye  heavrns,  andz've  far,  O  earth/" 
'Tis  God  himself  that  calls  attention  forth. 
Another  instance  I  shall  quote  is  from  the  mournful  Jt^remiah,  to  which  I  shall  add 
two  other  lines,  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  out  the  figure,  and  showing  the  intention 
of  the  poet : 

"  Of  that  mine  he-t/f  were  waters  and  mine  eyex  " 
Were  fountains  flowing  like  iho  liquid  skies; 
Then  would  I  give  the  mighty  flood  release, 
And  weep  a  deluge  for  the  human  race. 


20  AGE   OF    REASON. 

dote,  and  devotion  together  —  and  those  works  still  re- 
tain the  air  and  style  of  poetry,  though  in  translation. 

There  is  not,  throughout  the  whole  book  called  the 
Bible,  any  word  that  describes  to  us  what  we  call  a  poet, 
t^or  any  word  that  describes  what  we  call  poetry.  The 
case  is,  that  the  word  prophet^  to  which  latter  times  have 
affixed  a  new  idea,  was  the  Bible  word  for  poet,  and  the 
vfor6.  prophesying  meant  the  art  of  making  poetry.  It 
also  meant  the  art  of  playing  poetry  to  a  tune  upon  any 
instrument  of  music. 

We  read  of  prophesying  with  pipes,  tabrets,  and  horns 
— of  prophesying  with  harps,  with  psalteries,  with 
cymbals,  and  with  every  other  instrument  of  music  then 
in  fashion.  Were  we  now  to  speak  oi  prophesying  with 
a  fiddle,  or  with  a  pipe  and  tabor,  the  expression  would 
have  no  meaning  or  would  appear  ridiculous,  and  to 
some  people  contemptuous,  because  we  have  changed 
the  meaning  of  the  word. 

We  are  told  of  Saul  being  among  the  prophets^  and 
also  that  he  prophesied  ;  bat  we  are  not  told  what  they 
prophesied^  nor  what  he  prophesied.  The  case  is,  there 
was  nothing  to  tell ;  for  these  prophets  were  a  company 
of  musicians  and  poets,  and  Saul  joined  in  the  concert, 
and  this  was  csXXtd.  prophesyi7tg. 

The  account  given  of  this  affair  in  the  book  called 
Samuel  is,  that  Saul  met  a  company  of  prophets  ;  a  whole 
company  of  them  !  coming  down  with  a  psaltery,  a 
tabret,  a  pipe  and  a  harp,  and  that,  they  prophesied,  and 
that  he  prophesied  with  them.  But  it  appears  afterward, 
that  Saul  prophesied  badly  ;  that  is,  he  performed  his  part 
badly:  for  it  is  said,  that  an  'Vz/z7  spirit  from  God'''* 
came  upon  Saul,  and  he  prophesied. 

Now,  were  there  no  other  passage  in  the  book  called 

*As  those  men  who  call  themselves  divines  and  commentators,  are  very  fond  o/ 
puzzling  one  another,  I  leave  them  to  contest  the  meaning  of  the  first  part  of  the 
phrase,  thai  oi  an  evil  spirit  from  God.  I  keep  to  my  text — I  keep  to  the  meaning  of  the 
word  prophesy. 


AGE  OF   REASON.  31 

the  Bible  than  this,  to  demonstrate  to  us  that  we  have 
lost  the  original  meaning  of  the  \vor6. prophesy^  and  sub- 
stituted another  meaning  in  its  place,  this  alone  would 
be  sufiicient ;  for  it  is  impossible  to  use  and  apply  the 
viord. prophesy^  in  the  place  it  is  here  used  and  applied,  if 
we  give  to  it  the  sense  which  latter  times  have  affixed 
to  it.  The  manner  in  which  it  is  here  used  strips  it  of  all 
religious  meaning,  and  shows  that  a  man  might  then  be 
a  prophet,  or  he  might  prophesy^  as  he  may  now  be  a 
poet  or  a  musician,  without  any  regard  to  the  morality  or 
immorality  of  his  character.  The  word  was  originally 
a  term  of  science,  promiscuously  applied  to  poetry  and  to 
music,  and  not  restricted  to  any  subject  upon  which 
poetry  and  music  might  be  exercised. 

Deborah  and  Barak  are  called  prophets,  not  because 
they  predicted  anything,  but  because  they  composed  the 
poem  or  song  that  bears  their  name,  in  celebration  of  an 
act  already  done.  David  is  ranked  among  the  prophets, 
for  he  was  a  musician,  and  was  also  reputed  to  be  (though 
perhaps  very  erroneously)  the  author  of  the  Psalms.  But 
Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  are  not  called  prophets  ;  it 
does  not  appear  from  any  accounts  we  have  that  they 
could  either  sing,  play  music,  or  make  poetry. 

We  are  told  of  the  greater  and  the  lesser  prophets. 
They  might  as  well  tell  us  of  the  greater  and  the  lesser 
God  ;  for  there  cannot  be  degrees  in  prophesying  con- 
sistently with  its  modern  sense.  But  there  are  degrees 
in  poetry,  and  therefore  the  phrase  is  reconcilable  to  the 
case,  when  we  understand  by  it  the  greater  and  the  lesser 
poets. 

It  is  altogether  unnecessary,  after  this,  to  offer  any 
observations  upon  what  those  men,  styled  prophets,  have 
written.  The  axe  goes  at  once  to  the  root,  by  showing 
that  the  original  meaning  of  the  word  has  been  mis- 
taken ■  and  consequently  all  the  inferences  that  have 
been  drawn  from  those  books,  the  devotional  respect  that 


22  AGE  OF   REASON. 

has  been  paid  to  them,  and  the  labored  commentaries 
that  have  been  written  upon  them,  under  that  mistaken 
meaning,  are  not  worth  disputing  about.  In  many- 
things,  however,  the  writings  of  the  Jewish  poets  de- 
serve a  better  fate  than  that  of  being  bound  up,  as  they 
now  are  with  the  trash  that  accompanies  them,  under 
the  abused  name  of  the  word  of  God. 

If  we  permit  ourselves  to  conceive  right  ideas  of 
things,  we  must  necessarily  affix  the  idea,  not  only  of 
unchangeableness,  but  of  the  utter  impossibility  of  any 
change  taking  place,  by  any  means  or  accident  what- 
ever, in  that  which  we  would  honor  with  the  name  of 
the  word  of  God  ;  and  therefore  the  word  of  God  cannot 
exist  in  any  written  or  human  language. 

The  continually  progressive  change  to  which  the 
meaning  of  words  is  subject,  the  want  of  a  universal 
language  which  renders  translation  necessary',  the  errors 
to  which  translations  are  again  subject,  the  mistakes  of 
copyists  and  printers,  together  with  the  possibility  of 
willful  alteration,  are  of  themselves  evidences  that  the 
human  language,  whether  in  speech  or  in  print,  cannot 
be  the  vehicle  of  the  word  of  God.  The  word  of  God 
exists  in  something  else. 

Did  the  book  called  the  Bible  excel  in  purity  of  ideas 
and  expression  all  the  books  that  are  now  extant  in 
the  world,  I  would  not  take  it  for  my  nile  of  faith,  as 
being  the  word  of  God,  because  the  possibility  would 
nevertheless  exist  of  my  being  imposed  upon.  But 
when  I  see  throughout  the  greater  part  of  this  book 
scarcely  anything  but  a  history  of  the  grossest  vices 
and  a  collection  of  the  most  paltry  and  contemptible 
tales,  I  cannot  dishonor  my  Creator  by  calling  it  by 
his  name. 

Thus  much  for  the  Bible  ;  I  now  go  on  to  the  book 
called  the  New  Testament.  The  New  Testament  I  that  is, 
the  new  willy  as  if  there  could  be  two  wills  ot  the  Creator. 


a{;e  or  reason.  .    23 

Had  it  been  the  object  or  the  intention  of  Jesus  Christ 
to  establish  a  new  religion,  he  would  undoubtedly  have 
written  the  system  himself,  or  procured  it  to  be  written 
in  his  life-time.  But  there  is  no  publication  extant  au- 
thenticated with  his  name.  All  the  books  called  the 
New  Testament  were  written  after  his  death.  He  was 
a  Jew  by  birth  and  by  profession  ;  and  he  was  the  son 
of  God  in  like  manner  that  every  other  person  is  —  for 
the  Creator  is  the  Father  of  All. 

The  first  four  books,  called  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke, 
and  John,  do  not  give  a  history  of  the  life  of  Jesus 
Christ,  but  only  detached  anecdotes  of  him.  It  appears 
from  the.se  books  that  the  whole  time  of  his  being  a 
preacher  was  not  more  than  eighteen  months  ;  and  it 
was  only  during  this  short  time  that  these  men  became 
acquainted  with  him.  They  make  mention  of  him  at 
the  age  of  twelve  years,  sitting,  they  say,  among  the 
Jewish  doctors,  asking  and  answering  them  questions. 
As  this  was  several  years  before  their  acquaintance  with 
him  began,  it  is  n;ost  probable  they  had  this  anec- 
<iote  from  his  parents.  From  this  time  there  is  no  ac- 
count of  him  for  about  sixteen  years.  Where  he  lived, 
or  how  he  employed  himself  during  this  interval,  is  not 
known.  Most  probably  he  was  working  at  his  father's 
trade,  which  was  that  of  a  carpenter.  It  does  not  appear 
that  he  had  any  school  educatii/u,  and  the  probability  is, 
that  he  could  not  write,  for  his  parents  were  extremely 
poor,  as  appears  from  their  not  being  able  to  pay  for  a 
bed  when  he  was  born. 

It  is  somewhat  curious  that  the  three  persons  whose 
names  are  the  most  universally  recorded,  were  of  very 
obscure  parentage.  Moses  was  a  foundling  ;  Jesus  Christ 
was  bom  in  a  stable  ;  and  Mahomet  was  a  mule  driver. 
The  first  and  last  of  these  men  were  founders  of  different 
systems  of  religion  ;  but  Jesus  Clirist  founded  no  new 
system.     He  called  men  to  the  practice  of  moral  virtues 


24  AGE  OF   REASON. 

and  the  belief  of  one  God.  The  great  trait  in  his 
character  is  philanthropy. 

The  manner  in  which  he  was  apprehended  shows  that 
he  was  not  much  known  at  that  time  ;  and  it  shows  also, 
that  the  meetings  he  then  held  with  his  followers  were 
in  secret ;  and  that  he  had  g^ven  over  or  suspended 
preaching  publicly.  Judas  could  not  otherwise  betray 
him  than  by  giving  information  where  he  was,  and 
pointing  him  out  to  the  officers  that  went  to  arrest  him  ; 
and  the  reason  for  employing  and  paying  Judas  to  do 
this  could  arise  only  from  the  cause  already  mentioned^ 
that  of  his  not  being  much  known  and  living  concealed. 

The  idea  of  his  concealment  not  only  agprees  very  ill 
with  his  reputed  divinity,  but  associates  with  it  some- 
thing of  pusillanimity  ;  and  his  being  betrayed,  or  in 
other  words,  his  being  apprehended,  on  the  information 
of  one  of  his  followers,  shows  that  he  did  not  intend  to  be 
apprehended,  and  consequently  that  he  did  not  intend  to 
be  crucified. 

The  Christian  Mythologists  tell  us,  that  Christ  died 
for  the  sins  of  the  world,  and  that  he  came  on  purpose  ta 
die.  Would  it  not  then  have  been  the  same  if  he  had 
died  of  a  fever  or  of  the  small-pox,  of  old  age,  or  of  any- 
thing else? 

The  declaratory  sentence  which,  they  say,  wis  passed 
upon  Adam,  in  case  he  eat  of  the  apple,  was  not,  that 
thou  shall  surely  be  crucified^  but,  thou  shalt  surely  die 
— the  sentence  of  death,  and  not  the  manner  of  dying. 
Crucifixion,  therefore,  or  any  other  particular  manner  of 
dying,  made  no  part  of  the  sentence  that  Adam  was  to 
suffer,  and  consequently,  even  upon  their  own  tactics,  it 
could  make  no  part  of  the  sentence  that  Christ  was  to 
suffer  in  the  rocm  of  Adam.  A  fever  would  have  done 
as  well  as  a  cross,  if  there  was  any  occasion  for  either. 

The  sentence  of  death,  which  they  tell  us  was  thus 
passed    upon   Adam,    must    either    have   meant  dying 


•r.R  OF   REASON.  25 

naturally,  that  is,  ceasing  to  live,  or  have  meant  what 
these  Mythologists  call  damnation  ;  and,  consequently, 
tlie  act  of  dying  on  the  part  of  Jesus  Christ,  must,  ac- 
cording to  their  system,  apply  as  a  prevention  to  one  or 
other  of  these  two  things  happening  to  Adam  and  to  us. 

That  it  does  not  prevent  our  dying  is  evident,  because 
we  all  die ;  and  if  their  accounts  of  longevity  be  true, 
men  die  faster  since  the  crucifixion  than  before  ;  and 
with  respect  to  the  second  explanation  (including  with  it 
the  natural  death  of  Jesus  Christ  as  a  substitute  for  the 
eternal  death  or  damnation  of  all  mankind),  it  is  im- 
pertinently representing  the  Creator  as  coming  oflf,  or  re- 
voking the  sentence,  by  a  pun  or  a  quibble  upon  the 
wor6.  death.  That  manufacturer  of  quibbles,  St.  Paul,  if 
he  wrote  the  books  that  bear  his  name,  has  helped  this 
quibble  on  by  making  another  quibble  upon  the  word 
Adam.  He  makes  there  to  be  two  Adams  ;  the  one 
who  sins  in  fact,  and  suffers  by  proxy  ;  the  other  who 
sins  by  proxy,  and  suffers  in  fact.  A  religion  thus 
interlarded  with  quibble,  subterfuge,  and  pun  has  a 
tendency  to  instruct  its  professors  in  the  practice  of 
these  arts.  They  acquire  the  habit  without  being  aware 
of  the  cause. 

If  Jesus  Christ  was  the  being  which  those  Mythologists 
tell  us  he  was,  and  that  he  came  into  this  world  to  suffer^ 
which  is  a  word  they  sometimes  use  instead  of  to  die^ 
the  only  real  suffering  he  could  have  endured,  would 
have  been  to  live.  His  existence  here  was  a  state  of 
exilement  or  transportation  from  Heaven,  and  the  way 
back  to  his  original  country  was  to  die.  In  fine,  every- 
thing in  this  strange  system  is  the  reverse  of  what  it  pre- 
tends to  be.  It  is  the  reverse  of  truth,  and  I  become 
so  tired  of  examining  into  its  inconsistencies  and  ab- 
surdities, tliat  I  hasten  to  the  conclusion  of  it,  in  order 
to  proceed  to  something  better. 

How  much  or  what  parts  of  the  books  called  the  New 


26  AGE   OF   REASON. 

Testament,  were  written  by  the  persons  whose  names 
they  bear,  is  what  we  can  know  nothing  of;  neither  are 
we  certain  in  what  language  they  were  originally  written. 
The  matters  they  now  contain  may  be  classed  under  two 
heads — anecdote  and  epistolary  correspondence. 

The  fonr  books  already  mentioned,  Matthew,  Mark, 
Luke,  and  John,  are  altogether  anecdotal.  They  relate 
events  after  they  had  taken  place.  They  tell  what  Jesus 
Christ  did  and  said,  and  what  others  did  and  said  to  him  ; 
and  in  several  instances  they  relate  the  same  event  dif- 
ferently. Revelation  is  necessarily  out  of  the  question 
with  respect  to  those  books ;  not  only  because  of  the 
disagreement  of  the  writers,  but  because  revelation  can- 
not be  applied  to  the  relating  of  facts  by  the  person  who 
saw  them  done,  nor  to  the  relating  or  recording  of  any 
discourse  or  conversation  by  those  who  heard  it.  The 
book  called  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  (an  anonymous 
work)  belongs  also  to  the  anecdotal  part. 

All  the  other  parts  of  the  New  Testament,  except  the 
book  of  enigmas  called  the  Revelations,  are  a  collection 
of  letters  under  the  name  of  epistles  ;  and  the  forgery  of 
letters  has  been  such  a  common  practice  in  the  world, 
that  the  probability  is  at  least  equal,  whether  they  are 
genuine  or  forged.  One  thing,  however,  is  much  less 
equivocal,  which  is,  that  out  of  the  matters  contained  in 
f  those  books,  together  with  the  assistance  of  some  old 
.stories,  the  Church  has  set  up  a  s^-stem  of  religion  very 
contradictory  to  the  character  of  the  person  whose  name 
it  bears.  It  has  set  up  a  religion  of  pomp  and  of  revenue, 
in  pretended  imitation  of  a  person  whose  life  was  hu- 
mility and  poverty. 

The  invention  of  purgatory,  and  of  the  releasing  of 
souls  therefrom  by  prayers  bought  of  the  church  with 
money  ;  the  selling  of  pardons,  dispensations,  and  in- 
dulgences, are  revenue  laws,  without  bearing  that  name 
or  carrying  that  appearance.     But  the  case  nevertheless 


AGE  OF  REASON.  Z'J 

is,  that  those  things  derive  their  origin  from  the  par- 
oxysm of  the  crucifixion  and  the  theory  deduced  there- 
from, which  was  that  one  person  could  stand  in  the 
place  of  another,  and  could  perform  meritorious  service 
for  him.  The  probability,  therefore,  is  that  the  whole 
theory  or  doctrine  of  what  is  called  the  redemption 
(which  is  said  to  have  been  accomplished  by  the  act  of 
one  person  in  the  room  of  another)  was  originally 
fabricated  on  purpose  to  bring  forward  and  build  all 
those  secondary  and  pecuniary  redemptions  upon  ;  and 
that  the  passages  in  the  books,  upon  which  the  idea  or 
theory  of  redemption  is  built,  have  been  manufactured 
and  fabricated  for  that  purpose.  Why  are  we  to  give 
this  Church  credit  when  she  tells  us  that  those  books 
are  genuine  in  every  part,  any  more  than  we  give  her 
credit  for  everything  else  she  has  told  us,  or  for  the 
miracles  she  says  she  had  performed  ?  That  she  could 
fabricate  writings  is  certain,  because  she  could  write  ; 
and  the  composition  of  the  writings  in  question  is  of 
that  kind  that  anybody  might  do  it ;  and  that  she  did 
fabricate  them  is  not  more  inconsistent  with  probability 
than  that  she  could  tell  us,  as  she  has  done,  that  she 
could  and  did  work  miracles. 

Since,  then  no  external  evidence  can,  at  this  long  dis- 
tance of  time,  be  produced  to  prove  whether  the  Church 
fabricated  the  doctrines  called  redemption  or  not  (for 
such  evidence,  whether  for  or  against,  would  be  subject 
to  the  same  suspicion  of  being  fabricated),  the  case  can 
only  be  referred  to  the  internal  evidence  which  the  thing 
carries  within  itself;  and  this  affords  a  very  strong  pre- 
sumption of  its  being  a  fabrication.  For  the  internal 
evidence  is  that  the  theory  or  doctrine  of  redemption 
has  for  its  base  an  idea  of  pecuniary  justice,  and  not 
that  of  moral  justice. 

If  I  owe  a  person  money,  and  cannot  pay  him,  and  he 
threatens  to  put  me  in  prison,  another  person  can  take 


28  AGE  OF   REASON. 

the  debt  upon  himself,  and  pay  it  for  me  ;  but  if  I  have 
committed  a  crime,  every  circumstance  of  the  case  is 
changed  ;  moral  justice  cannot  take  the  innocent  for  the 
guilty,  even  if  the  innocent  would  oflfer  itself.  To  sup- 
pose justice  to  do  this,  is  to  destroy  the  principle  of  its 
existence,  which  is  the  thing  itself ;  it  is  then  no  longer 
justice,  it  is  indiscriminate  revenge. 

This  single  reflection  will  show,  that  the  doctrine  of 
redemption  is  founded  on  a  mere  pecuniary  idea  cor- 
responding to  that  of  a  debt  which  another  person  might 
pay  ;  and  as  this  pecuniary  idea  corresponds  again  with 
the  system  of  second  redemption,  obtained  through  the 
means  of  money  given  to  the  Church  for  pardons,  the 
probability  is  that  the  same  persons  fabricated  both  the 
one  and  the  other  of  those  theories  ;  and  that,  in  truth 
there  is  no  such  thing  as  redemption — that  it  is  fabulous, 
and  that  man  stands  in  the  same  relative  condition  with 
his  Maker  as  he  ever  did  stand  since  man  existed,  and 
that  it  is  his  greatest  consolation  to  think  so. 

Let  him  believe  this,  and  he  will  live  more  consistently 
and  morally  than  by  any  other  system  ;  it  is  by  his 
being  taught  to  contemplate  himself  as  an  outlaw,  as  an 
outcast,  as  a  beggar,  as  a  mumper,  as  one  thrown,  as  it 
were,  on  a  dunghill  at  an  immense  distance  from  his 
Creator,  and  who  must  make  his  approaches  by  creeping 
and  cringing  to  intermediate  beings,  that  he  conceives 
either  a  contemptuous  disregard  for  everything  under  the 
name  of  religion,  or  becomes  indifferent,  or  turns  what 
he  calls  devout.  In  the  latter  case,  he  consumes  his  life 
in  grief,  or  the  affectation  of  it ;  his  prayers  are  re- 
proaches ;  his  humility  is  ingratitude ;  he  calls  himself 
a  worm,  and  the  fertile  earth  a  dunghill ;  and  all  the 
blessings  of  life  by  the  thankless  name  of  vanities  ;  he 
despises  the  choicest  gift  of  God  to  man,  the  gift  of 
REASON  ;  and  having  endeavored  to  force  upon  himself 
the  belief  of  a  system  against  which  reason  revolts,  he 


AGB  OP   REASON.  39 

ungratefully  calls  it  human  reason^  as  if  man  could  g^ve 
reason  to  himself. 

Yet,  with  all  this  strange  appearance  of  humility  and 
this  contempt  for  human  reason,  he  ventures  into  the 
boldest  presumptions  ;  he  finds  fault  with  everj-'thing  ; 
his  selfishness  is  never  satisfied  ;  his  ingratitude  is  never 
at  an  end.  He  takes  on  himself  to  direct  the  Almighty 
what  to  do,  even  in  the  government  of  the  universe  ; 
he  prays  dictatorially  ;  when  it  is  sunshine,  he  prays 
for  rain,  and  when  it  is  rain,  he  prays  for  sunshine  ; 
he  follows  the  same  idea  in  everything  that  he  prays 
for ;  for  what  is  the  amount  of  all  his  prayers  but  an 
attempt  to  make  the  Almighty  change  his  mind,  and 
act  otherwise  than  he  does?  It  is  as  if  he  were  to  say: 
Thou  knowest  not  so  well  as  I. 

But  some,  perhaps,  will  say:  Are  we  to  have  no  word 
of  God  —  no  revelation  ?  I  answer,  Yes  ;  there  is  a 
word  of  God  ;  there  is  a  revelation. 

The  word  of  God  is  the  creation  we  behold  - 
and  it  is  in  this  word^  which  no  human  invention  can  coun- 
terfeit or  alter,  that  God  speaketh  universally  to  man. 

Human  language  is  local  and  changeable,  and  is  there- 
fore incapable  of  being  used  as  the  means  of  unchange- 
able and  universal  information.  The  idea  that  God  sent 
Jesus  Christ  to  publish,  as  they  say,  the  glad  tidings  to 
all  nations,  from  one  end  of  the  earth  to  the  other,  is 
consistent  only  with  the  ignorance  of  those  who  knew 
nothing  of  the  extent  of  the  world,  and  who  believed,  as 
those  world-saviours  believed,  and  continued  to  believe 
for  several  centuries  (and  that  in  contradiction  to  the 
discoveries  of  philosophers  and  the  experience  of  navi- 
gators), that  the  earth  was  flat  like  a  trencher,  and  that 
man  might  walk  to  the  end  of  it. 

But  how  was  Jesus  Christ  to  make  anything  known  to 
all  nations?  He  could  speak  but  one  language,  which 
was  Hebrew,  and  there  are  in  the  world  several  hundred 


2p  AGE   OF   REASON. 

languages.  Scarcely  any  two  nations  speak  the  same 
language,  or  understand  each  other;  and  as  to  trans- 
lations, every  man  who  knows  anything  of  languages 
knows  that  it  is  impossible  to  translate  from  one 
language  to  another,  not  only  without  losing  a  g^eat 
part  of  the  original,  but  frequently  of  mistaking  the 
sense  ;  and  besides  all  this,  the  art  of  printing  was  wholly 
unknown  at  the  time  Christ  lived. 

It  is  always  necessary  that  the  means  that  are  to  ac- 
complish any  end  be  equal  to  the  accomplishment  of 
that  end,  or  the  end  cannot  be  accomplished.  It  is  in 
this  that  the  diflference  between  finite  and  infinite  power 
and  wisdom  discovers  itself.  Man  frequently  fails  in  ac- 
complishing his  ends,  from  a  natural  inability  of  the 
power  to  the  purpose,  and  frequently  from  the  want  of 
wisdom  to  apply  power  properly.  But  it  is  impossible 
for  infinite  power  and  wisdom  to  fail  as  man  faileth. 
The  means  it  useth  are  always  equal  to  the  end  ;  but 
human  language,  more  especially  as  there  is  not  an  uni- 
versal language,  is  incapable  of  being  used  as  an  uni- 
versal means  of  unchangeable  and  uniform  information, 
and  therefore  it  is  not  the  means  that  God  useth  in 
manifesting  himself  universally  to  man. 

It  is  only  in  the  Creation  that  all  our  ideas  and  con- 
ceptions of  a  word  of  God  can  unite.  The  Creation 
speaketh  an  universal  language,  independently  of  human 
speech  or  human  language,  multiplied  and  various  as 
they  may  be.  It  is  an  ever-existing  original,  which 
every  man  can  read.  It  cannot  be  forged  ;  it  cannot  be 
counterfeited  ;  it  cannot  be  lost ;  it  cannot  be  altered  ; 
it  cannot  be  suppressed.  It  does  not  depend  upon  the 
will  of  man  whether  it  shall  be  published  or  not  ;  it 
publishes  itself  from  one  end  of  the  earth  to  the  other. 
It  preaches  to  all  nations  and  to  all  worlds  ;  and  this 
word  of  God  reveals  to  man  all  that  is  necessary  for  man 
to  know  of  God. 


k 


AGE  OP  REASON.  3I 

Do  we  want  to  contemplate  his  power?  We  see 
It  in  the  immensity  of  the  Creation.  Do  we  want 
to  contemplate  his  wisdom?  We  see  it  in  the  un- 
changeable order  by  which  the  incomprehensible 
whole  is  governed.  Do  we  want  to  contemplate  his 
munificence  ?  We  see  it  in  the  abundance  with  which 
he  fills  the  earth.  Do  we  want  to  contemplate  his 
mercy?  We  see  it  in  his  not  withholding  that  abun- 
dance even  from  the  unthankftil.  In  fine,  do  we  want 
to  know  what  God  is  ?  Search  not  the  book  called  the 
Scripture,  which  any  human  hand  might  make,  but  the 
Scripture  called  the  Creation. 

The  only  idea  man  can  affix  to  the  name  of  God  is 
that  of  a  y?rj/  cause^  the  cause  of  all  things.  And  in- 
comprehensible and  difficult  as  it  is  for  a  man  to  con- 
ceive what  a  first  cause  is,  he  arrives  at  the  belief  of  it 
from  the  tenfold  greater  difficulty  of  disbelieving  it.  It 
is  difficult  beyond  description  to  conceive  that  space  can 
have  no  end  ;  but  it  is  more  difficult  to  conceive  an  end. 
It  is  difficult  beyond  the  power  of  man  to  conceive  an 
eternal  duration  of  what  we  call  time  ;  but  it  is  more  im- 
possible to  conceive  a  time  when  there  shall  be  no  time. 

In  like  manner  of  reasoning,  everything  we  behold 
carries  in  itself  the  internal  evidence  that  it  did  not 
make  itself.  Every  man  is  an  evidence  to  himself  that 
he  did  not  make  himself ;  neither  could  his  father  make 
himself,  nor  his  grandfather,  nor  any  of  his  race  ;  neither 
could  any  tree,  plant,  or  animal  make  itself ;  and  it  is 
the  conviction  arising  from  this  evidence  that  carries  us 
on,  as  it  were,  by  necessity  to  the  belief  of  a  first  cause 
eternally  existing,  of  a  nature  totally  different  to  any 
material  existence  we  know  of,  and  by  the  power  of 
which  all  things  exist ;  and  this  first  cause  man  calls  God. 

It  is  only  by  the  exercise  of  reason  that  man  can  dis- 
cover God.  Take  away  that  reason,  and  he  would  be 
incapable  of  understanding  anything  ;  and,  in  this  case. 


32  AGE   OF   REASON. 

it  would  be  just  as  consistent  to  read  even  the  book 
called  the  Bible  to  a  horse  as  to  a  man.  How,  then,  is 
it  that  those  people  pretend  to  reject  reason  ? 

Almost  'the  only  parts  in  the  book  called  the  Bible 
that  convey  to  us  any  idea  of  God,  are  some  chapters  in 
Job  and  the  19th  Psalm  ;  I  recollect  no  other.  Those 
parts  are  true  deistical  compositions,  for  they  treat  of  the 
Deity  through  his  works.  They  take  the  book  of 
Creation  as  the  word  of  God,  they  refer  to  no  ether  book, 
and  all  the  inferences  they  make  are  drawn  from  that 
volume. 

I  insert  in  this  place  the  19th  Psalm,  as  paraphrased 
into  English  verse  by  Addison.  I  recollect  not  the 
prose,  and  where  I  write  this  I  have  not  the  opportunity 
of  seeing  it. 

"  The  spacious  firmament  on  high. 
With  all  the  blue  ethereal  sky, 
And  spangled  heavens,  a  shining  frame, 
Their  great  original  proclaim. 
The  unwearied  sun,  from  day  to  day, 
Does  his  Creator's  power  display ; 
And  publishes  to  every  land 
The  work  of  an  Almighty  hand. 

"  Soon  as  the  evening  shades  prevail. 
The  moon  takes  up  the  wondrous  tale. 
And  nightly  to  the  list'ning  earth 
Repeats  the  story  of  her  birth ; 
While  all  the  stars  that  round  her  bum. 
And  all  the  planets,  in  their  turn, 
Confirm  the  tidings  as  they  roll, 
And  spread  the  truth  from  pole  to  pole. 

**  What,  though  in  solemn  silence  all 
Move  round  this  dark  terrestrial  ball  ? 
What  though  no  real  voice,  nor  sound. 
Amidst  their  radiant  orbs  be  found  ? 
In  reason's  ear  they  all  rejoice 
And  utter  forth  a  glorious  voice, 
Forever  singing,  as  they  shine, 
The  hand  that  hade  us  is  divihb.'* 


AGB  OP  REASON.  $$ 

What  more  does  man  want  to  know  than  that  the 
hand  or  power  that  made  these  things  is  divine,  is  om- 
nipotent ?  Let  him  believe  this  with  the  force  it  is  im- 
possible to  repel,  if  he  permits  his  reason  to  act,  and  his 
rule  of  moral  life  will  follow  of  course. 

The  allusions  in  Job  have,  all  of  them,  the  same 
tendency  with  this  Psalm  ;  that  of  deducing  or  proving- 
a  truth  that  would  be  otherwise  unknown,  from  truths 
already  known. 

I  recollect  not  enough  of  the  passages  in  Job  to  insert 
them  correctly  ;  but  there  is  one  occurs  to  me  that  is  ap>- 
plicable  to  the  subject  I  am  speaking  upon.  **  Canst 
thou  by  searching  find  out  God  ?  Canst  thou  find  out 
the  Almighty  to  perfection  ?  " 

I  know  not  how  the  printers  have  pointed  this  passage, 
for  I  keep  no  Bible  ;  but  it  contains  two  distinct  questions 
that  admit  of  distinct  answers. 

firsi, — Canst  thou  by  searching  find  out  God?  Yes  ; 
l)ecause,  in  the  first  place,  I  know  I  did  not  make  myself, 
and  yet  I  have  existence  ;  and  by  searching  into  the 
nature  of  other  things,  I  find  that  no  other  thing  could 
make  itself  ;  and  yet  millions  of  other  things  exist ; 
therefore  it  is,  that  I  know,  by  positive  conclusion  re- 
sulting from  this  search,  that  there  is  a  power  superior 
to  all  those  things,  and  that  power  is  God. 

Secondly^ — Canst  thou  find  out  the  Almighty  \.o  per- 
fection ?  No ;  not  only  because  the  power  and  wisdom 
He  has  manifested  in  the  structure  of  the  Creation  that 
I  behold  is  to  me  incomprehensible,  but  because  even 
this  manifestation,  great  as  it  is,  is  probably  but  a  small 
display  of  that  immensity  of  power  and  wisdom  by 
which  millions  of  other  worlds,  to  me  invisible  by  their 
distance,  were  created  and  continue  to  exist. 

It  is  evident  that  both  these  questions  were  put  to  the 
reason  of  the  person  to  whom  they  are  supposed  to  have 
been   addressed  ;  and  it  is  only  by  admitting  the  first 


34  AGE  OF  REASON. 

question  to  be  answered  aflfinnatively,  that  the  second 
could  follow.  It  would  have  been  unnecessary,  and  even 
absurd,  to  have  put  a  second  question,  more  difficult 
than  the  first,  if  the  first  question  had  been  answered 
negatively.  The  two  questions  have  different  objects  ; 
the  first  refers  to  the  existence  of  God,  the  second  to  his 
attributes  ;  reason  can  discover  the  one,  but  it  falls  in- 
finitely short  in  discovering  the  whole  of  the  other. 

I  recollect  not  a  single  passage  in  all  the  writings 
ascribed  to  the  men  called  apostles,  that  conveys  any  idea 
of  what  God  is.  Those  writings  are  chiefly  contro- 
versial ;  and  the  subjects  they  dwell  upon,  that  of  a  man 
dying  in  agony  on  a  cross,  is  better  suited  to  the  gloomy 
genius  of  a  monk  in  a  cell,  by  whom  it  is  not  impossible 
they  were  written,  than  to  any  man  breathing  the  open 
air  of  the  Creation.  The  only  passage  that  occurs  to 
me,  that  has  any  reference  to  the  works  of  God,  by 
which  only  his  power  and  wisdom  can  be  known,  is  re- 
lated to  have  been  spoken  by  Jesus  Christ  as  a  remedy 
against  distrustful  care.  ' '  Behold  the  lilies  of  the  field, 
they  toil  not,  neither  do  they  spin. ' '  This,  however,  is 
far  inferior  to  the  allusions  in  Job  and  in  the  19th  Psalm  ; 
but  it  is  similar  in  idea,  and  the  modesty  of  the  imagery 
is  correspondent  to  the  modesty  of  the  man. 

As  to  the  Christian  system  of  faith,  it  appears  to  me 
as  a  species  of  Atheism  —  a  sort  of  religious  denial  of 
God.  It  professes  to  believe  in  a  man  rather  than  in 
God.  It  is  a  compound  made  up  chiefly  of  Manism  with 
but  little  Deism,  and  is  as  near  to  Atheism  as  twilight  is 
to  darkness.  It  introduces  between  man  and  his  Maker 
an  opaque  body,  which  it  calls  a  Redeemer,  as  the  moon 
introduces  her  opaque  self  between  the  earth  and  the 
sun,  and  it  produces  by  this  means  a  religious,  or  an 
irreligious,  eclipse  of  light.  It  has  put  the  whole  orbit 
of  reason  into  shade. 

The  efiect  of  this  obscurity  has  been  that  of  turning 


AGE  OF  REASON.  35 

everything  upside  down,  and  representing  it  in  reverse, 
and  among  the  revolutions  it  has  thus  magically  pro- 
duced, it  has  made  a  revolution  in  theology. 

That  which  is  now  called  natural  philosophy,  em- 
bracing the  whole  circle  of  science,  of  which  astronomy 
occupies  the  chief  place,  is  the  study  of  the  works  of 
God,  and  of  the  power  and  wisdom  of  God  in  his  works, 
and  is  the  true  theology. 

As  to  the  theology  that  is  now  studied  in  its  place,  it 
is  the  study  of  human  opinions  and  of  human  fancies 
concerning  (^o^.  It  is  not  the  study  of  God  himself  in 
the  works  that  he  has  made,  but  in  the  works  or  writings 
that  man  has  made  ;  and  it  is  not  among  the  least  of  the 
mischiefs  that  the  Christian  system  has  done  to  the 
world,  that  it  has  abandoned  the  original  and  beautiful 
system  of  theolog>',  like  a  beautiful  innocent,  to  distress 
and  reproach,  to  make  room  for  the  hag  of  superstition. 

The  Book  of  Job  and  the  19th  Psalm,  which  even  the 
Church  admits  to  be  more  ancient  than  the  chronological 
order  in  which  they  stand  in  the  book  called  the  Bible, 
are  theological  orations  conformable  to  the  original 
system  of  theology.  The  internal  evidence  of  those 
orations  proves  to  a  demonstration  that  the  study  and 
contemplation  of  the  works  of  creation,  and  of  the  power 
and  wisdom  of  God,  revealed  and  manifested  in  those 
works,  made  a  great  part  in  the  religious  devotion  of  the 
times  in  which  they  were  written  ;  and  it  was  this  de- 
votional study  and  contemplation  that  led  to  the  dis- 
covery of  the  principles  upon  which  what  are  now  called 
sciences  are  established  ;  and  it  is  to  the  discovery  of 
these  principles  that  almost  all  the  arts  that  contribute 
to  the  convenience  of  human  life  owe  their  existence. 
Every  principal  art  has  some  science  for  its  parent, 
though  the  person  who  mechanically  performs  the  work 
does  not  always,  and  but  very  seldom,  perceive  the  con- 
nection. 


^6  AGE  OP   REASON. 

It  is  a  fraud  of  the  Christian  system  to  call  the  sciences 
human  invention;  it  is  only  the  application  of  them  that 
is  human.  Every  science  has  for  its  basis  a  system  of 
principles  as  fixed  and  unalterable  as  those  by  which 
the  universe  is  regulated  and  governed.  Man  cannot 
make  principles,  he  can  only  discover  them. 

For  example :  Every  person  who  looks  at  an  alma- 
nac sees  an  account  when  an  eclipse  will  take  place,  and 
he  sees  also  that  it  never  fails  to  take  place  according 
to  the  account  there  given.  This  shows  that  man  is  ac- 
quainted with  the  laws  by  which  the  heavenly  bodies 
move.  But  it  would  be  something  worse  than  ignorance, 
were  any  Church  on  earth  to  say  that  those  laws  are  a 
human  invention.  It  would  also  be  ignorance,  or  some- 
thing worse,  tc  say  that  the  scientific  principles  by 
the  aid  of  which  man  is  enabled  to  calculate  and  foreknow 
when  an  ecilpse  will  take  place,  are  a  human  invention. 
Man  cannot  invent  a  thing  that  is  eternal  and  immutable  ; 
and  the  scientific  principles  he  employs  for  this  purpose 
must  be,  and  are  of  necessity,  as  eternal  and  immutable  as 
the  laws  by  which  the  heavenly  bodies  move,  or  they 
could  not  be  used  as  they  are  to  ascertain  the  time  when,, 
and  the  manner  how,  an  eclipse  will  take  place. 

The  scientific  principles  that  man  employs  to  obtain 
the  foreknowledge  of  an  eclipse,  or  of  anything  else  re- 
lating to  the  motion  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  are  con- 
tained chiefly  in  that  part  of  science  which  is  called 
trigonometry,  or  the  properties  of  a  triangle,  which,  when 
applied  to  the  study  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  is  called 
astronomy  ;  when  applied  to  direct  the  course  of  a  ship 
on  the  ocean,  it  is  called  navigation  ;  when  applied  ta 
the  construction  of  figures  drawn  by  rule  and  compass,  it 
is  called  geometry ;  when  applied  to  the  construction  of 
plans  or  edifices,  it  is  called  architecture  ;  when  applied 
to  the  measurement  of  any  portion  of  the  surface  of  the 
earth,  it  is  called  land  surveying.     In  fine,  it  is  the  soul 


AGE   OP   REASON.  37 

of  science  ;  it  is  an  eternal  truth  ;  it  contains  the  mathe- 
matical demonstration  of  which  man  speaks,  and  the  ex- 
tent of  its  uses  is  unknown. 

It  may  be  said  that  man  can  make  or  draw  a  triangle, 
and  therefore  a  triangle  is  a  human  invention. 

But  the  triangle,  when  drawn,  is  no  other  than  the 
image  of  the  principle  ;  it  is  a  delineation  to  the  eye,  and 
from  thence  to  the  mind,  of  a  principle  that  would  other- 
wise be  imperceptible.  The  triangle  does  not  make  the 
principle,  any  more  than  a  candle  taken  into  a  room 
that  was  dark  makes  the  chairs  and  tables  that  before 
were  invisible.  All  the  properties  of  a  triangle  exist  in- 
dependently of  the  figure,  and  existed  before  any  tri- 
angle was  drawn  or  thought  of  by  man.  Man  had  no 
more  to  do  in  the  formation  of  these  properties  or  prin- 
ciples, than  he  had  to  do  in  making  the  laws  by  which 
the  heavenly  bodies  move  ;  and  therefore  the  one  must 
have  the  same  Divine  origin  as  the  other. 

In  the  same  manner,  as  it  may  be  said,  that  man  can 
make  a  triangle,  so  also,  may  it  be  said,  he  can  make  the 
mechanical  instrument  called  a  lever  ;  but  the  principle 
by  which  the  lever  acts  is  a  thing  distinct  from  the  in- 
strument, and  would  exist  if  the  instrument  did  not ;  it 
attaches  itself  to  the  instrument  after  it  is  made  ;  the  in- 
strument, therefore,  cannot  act  otherwise  than  it  does 
act ;  neither  can  all  the  eflforts  of  human  invention  make 
it  act  otherwise — that  which,  in  all  such  cases,  man 
calls  the  effect  is  no  other  than  the  principle  itself  ren- 
dered perceptible  to  the  senses. 

Since,  then,  man  cannot  make  principles,  from  whence 
did  he  gain  a  knowledge  of  them,  so  as  to  be  able  to 
apply  them,  not  only  to  things  on  earth,  but  to  ascertain 
the  motion  of  bodies  so  immensely  distant  from  him  as 
all  the  heavenly  bodies  are  ?  From  whence,  I  ask,  could 
he  gain  that  knowledge,  but  from  the  study  of  the  true 
theology? 


38  AGE   OF   REASON. 

It  is  the  structure  of  the  universe  that  has  taught  this 
knowledge  to  man.  That  structure  is  an  ever-existing 
exhibition  of  every  principle  upon  which  every  part  of 
mathematical  science  is  founded.  The  oflfspring  of  this 
science  is  mechanics  ;  for  mechanics  is  no  other  than  the 
principles  of  science  applied  practically.  The  man  who 
proportions  the  several  parts  of  a  mill,  uses  the  same 
scientific  principles  as  if  he  had  the  power  of  constructing 
a  universe ;  but  as  he  cannot  give  to  matter  that  invisible 
agency  by  which  all  the  component  parts  of  the  immense 
machine  of  the  universe  have  influence  upon  each  other, 
and  act  in  motional  unison  together,  without  any  ap- 
parent contact,  and  to  which  man  has  given  the  name  of 
attraction,  gravitation,  and  repulsion,  he  supplies  the 
place  of  that  agency  by  the  humble  imitation  of  teeth 
and  cogs.  All  the  parts  of  man's  microcosm  must  visi- 
bly touch  ;  but  could  he  gain  a  knowledge  of  that 
agency,  so  as  to  be  able  to  apply  it  in  practice,  we  mi^ht 
then  say  that  another  canonical  book  of  the  Word  of  God 
had  been  discovered. 

If  man  could  alter  the  properties  of  the  lever,  so  also 
could  he  alter  the  properties  of  the  triangle,  for  a  lever 
(taking  that  sort  of  lever  which  is  called  a  steelyard,  for 
the  sake  of  explanation)  forms,  when  in  motion,  a  tri- 
angle. The  line  it  descends  from  (one  point  of  that  line 
being  in  the  fulcrum),  the  line  it  descends  to,  and  the  cord 
of  the  arc  which  the  end  of  the  lever  describes  in  the 
air,  are  the  three  sides  of  a  triangle.  The  other  arm  of 
the  levei^  describes  also  a  triangle  ;  and  the  corresponding 
sides  of  those  two  triangles,  calculated  scientifically,  or 
measured  geometrically,  and  also  the  sines,  tangents, 
and  secants  generated  from  the  angles,  and  geometrically 
measured,  have  the  same  proportions  to  each  other,  as 
the  different  weights  have  that  will  balance  e:ich  other 
on  the  lever,  leaving  the  weight  of  the  lever  out  of  the 
case. 


AGB  OP   REASON.  39 

It  may  also  be  said,  that  man  can  make  a  wheel  and 
axis ;  that  he  can  put  wheels  of  different  magnitudes  to- 
gether, and  produce  a  mill.  Still  the  case  comes  back 
to  the  same  point,  which  is,  that  he  did  not  make  the 
principle  that  gives  the  wheels  those  powers.  That 
principle  is  as  unalterable  as  in  the  fonner  case,  or  rather 
it  is  the  same  principle  under  a  different  appearance  to 
the  eye. 

The  power  that  two  wheels  of  different  magnitudes 
have  upon  each  other,  is  in  the  same  proportion  as  if  the 
semi-diameter  of  the  two  wheels  were  joined  together  and 
made  into  that  kind  of  lever  I  have  described,  suspended 
at  the  part  where  the  semi-diameters  join  ;  for  the  two 
wheels,  scientifically  considered,  are  no  other  than  the 
two  circles  generated  by  tlie  motion  of  the  compound 
lever. 

It  is  from  the  study  of  the  true  theology  that  all  oui 
knowledge  of  science  is  derived,  and  it  is  from  that 
knowledge  that  all  the  arts  have  originated. 

The  Almighty  Lecturer,  by  displaying  the  principles 
of  science  in  the  structure  of  the  universe,  has  invited 
man  to  study  and  to  imitation.  It  is  as  if  He  had  said 
to  the  inhabitants  of  this  globe,  that  we  call  ours,  "I 
have  made  an  earth  for  man  to  dwell  upon,  and  I  have 
rendered  the  starry  heavens  visible,  to  teach  him  science 
and  the  arts.     He  can  now  provide  for  his  own  comfort, 

AND  LEARN  FROM  MY  MUNIFICENCE  TO  ALL,  TO  BE  laND 
TO  EACH  OTHER." 

Of  what  use  is  it,  unless  it  be  to  teach  man  something, 
that  his  eye  is  endowed  with  the  power  of  beholding  to 
an  incomprehensible  distance,  an  immensity  of  worlds 
revolving  in  the  ocean  of  space?  Or  of  what  use  is  it 
that  this  immensity  of  worlds  is  visible  to  man  ?  What 
has  man  to  do  with  the  Pleiades,  with  Orion,  with  Sirius, 
with  the  star  he  calls  the  North  Star,  with  the  moving 
orbs  he  has  named  Saturn,  Jupiter,  Mars,  Venus,  and 


40  AGE  OF   REASON. 

Mercury,  if  no  uses  are  to  follow  from  their  being  visible? 
A  less  power  of  vision  would  have  been  sufficient  for 
man,  if  the  immensity  he  now  possesses  were  given  only 
to  waste  itself,  as  it  were,  on  an  immense  desert  of  space 
glittering  with  shows. 

It  is  only  by  contemplating  what  he  calls  the  starry 
heavens,  as  the  book  and  school  of  science,  that  he  dis- 
covers any  use  in  their  being  visible  to  him,  or  any  ad- 
vantage resulting  from  his  immensity  of  vision.  But 
when  he  contemplates  the  subject  in  this  light,  he  sees 
an  additional  motive  for  saying,  that  nothing  was  made 
in  vain;  for  in  vain  would  be  this  power  of  vision  if  it 
taught  man  nothing. 

As  the  Christian  system  of  faith  has  made  a  revolution 
in  theology,  so  also  has  it  made  a  revolution  in  the  state 
of  learning.  That  which  is  now  called  learning,  was 
not  learning  originally.  Learning  does  not  consist,  as 
the  schools  now  make  it  consist,  in  the  knowledge  of 
languages,  but  in  the  knowledge  of  things  to  which 
language  gplves  names. 

The  Greeks  were  a  learned  people,  but  learning  with 
them  did  not  consist  in  speaking  Greek,  any  more  than 
in  a  Roman's  speaking  Latin,  or  a  Frenchman's  speaking 
French,  or  an  Englishman's  speaking  English.  From 
what  we  know  of  the  Greeks,  it  does  not  appear  that  they 
knew  or  studied  any  language  but  their  own,  and  this 
was  one  cause  of  their  becoming  so  learned  :  it  afforded 
them  more  time  to  apply  themselves  to  better  studies. 
The  schools  of  the  Greeks  were  schools  of  science  and 
philosophy,  and  not  of  languages  ;  and  it  is  in  the 
knowledge  of  the  things  that  science  and  philosophy 
teach,  that  learning  consists. 

Almost  all  the  scientific  learning  that  now  exists  came 
to  us  from  the  Greeks,  or  the  people  who  spoke  the 
Greek  language.  It,  therefore,  became  necessary  fol 
the  people  of  other  nations  who  spoke  a.  diflferent  Ian- 


AGB  OF   REASON.  4Z 

guage  that  some  among  them  should  leam  the  Greek 
language,  in  order  that  the  learning  the  Greeks  had, 
might  be  made  known  in  those  nations,  by  translating 
the  Greek  books  of  science  and  philosophy  into  the 
mother  tongue  of  each  nation. 

The  study,  therefore,  of  the  Greek  language  (and  in 
the  same  manner  for  the  Latin)  was  no  other  than  the 
drudgery  business  of  a  linguist ;  and  the  language  thus 
obtained,  was  no  other  than  the  means,  as  it  were  the 
tools,  employed  to  obtain  the  learning  the  Greeks  had. 
It  made  no  part  of  the  learning  itself,  and  was  so  distinct 
from  it,  as  to  make  it  exceedingly  probable  that  the 
persons  who  had  studied  Greek  sufl5ciently  to  translate 
those  works,  such,  for  instance,  as  Euclid's  Elements, 
did  not  understand  any  of  the  learning  the  works  con- 
tained. 

As  there  is  now  nothing  new  to  be  learned  from  the 
dead  languages,  all  the  useful  books  being  already  trans- 
lated, the  languages  are  become  useless,  and  the  time 
expended  in  teaching  and  learning  them  is  wasted.  So 
far  as  the  study  of  languages  may  contribute  to  the  pro- 
gress and  communication  of  knowledge,  (for  it  has  nothing 
to  do  with  the  creation  of  knowledge),  it  is  only  in  the 
living  languages  that  new  knowledge  is  to  be  found  ; 
and  certain  it  is  that,  in  general,  a  youth  will  learn  more 
of  a  living  language  in  one  year,  than  of  a  dead  language 
in  seven,  and  it  is  but  seldom  that  the  teacher  knows 
much  of  it  himself.  The  difficulty  of  learning  the  dead 
languages  does  not  arise  from  any  superior  abstruseness 
in  the  languages  themselves,  but  in  their  being  dead^  and 
the  pronunciation  entirely  lost.  It  would  be  the  same 
thing  with  any  other  language  when  it  becomes  dead. 
The  best  Greek  linguist  that  now  exists  does  not  under- 
stand Greek  so  well  as  a  Grecian  plowman  did,  or  a 
Grecian  milkmaid  ;  and  the  same  for  the  Latin,  com- 
pared with  a  plowman  or  milkmaid  of  the  Romans  ;  it 


43  AGE  OF    REASON. 

would  therefore  be  advantageous  to  the  state  of  learning 
to  abolish  the  study  of  the  dead  languages,  and  to 
make  learning  consist,  as  it  originally  did,  in  scientific 
knowledge. 

The  apology  that  is  sometimes  made  for  continuing 
to  teach  the  dead  languages  is,  that  they  are  taught  at  a 
time  when  a  child  is  not  capable  of  exerting  any  other 
mental  faculty  than  that  of  memory ;  but  that  is  alto- 
gether erroneous.  The  human  mind  has  a  natural  dis- 
position to  scientific  knowledge,  and  to  the  things  con- 
nected with  it.  The  first  and  favorite  amusement  of  a 
child,  even  before  it  begins  to  play,  is  that  of  imitating 
the  works  of  man.  It  builds  houses  with  cards  or  sticks ; 
it  navigates  the  little  ocean  of  a  bowl  of  water  with  a 
paper  boat,  or  dams  the  stream  of  a  gutter  and  contrives 
something  which  it  calls  a  mill ;  and  it  interests  itself  in 
the  fate  of  its  works  with  a  care  that  resembles  affection. 
It  afterwards  goes  to  school,  where  its  genius  is  killed  by 
the  barren  study  of  a  dead  language,  and  the  philosopher 
is  lost  in  the  linguist. 

But  the  apology  that  is  now  made  for  continuing  to 
teach  the  dead  languages,  could  not  be  the  cause,  at 
first,  of  cutting  down  learning  to  the  narrow  and  humble 
sphere  of  linguistry  ;  the  cause,  therefore,  must  be  sought 
for  elsewhere.  In  all  researches  of  this  kind,  the  best 
evidence  that  can  be  produced,  is  the  internal  evidence 
the  thing  carries  with  itseli,  and  the  evidence  of  circum- 
stances that  unite  with  it  ;  both  of  which,  in  this  case, 
are  not  difficult  to  be  discovered. 

Putting  then  aside,  as  a  matter  of  distinct  consider- 
ation, the  outrage  offered  to  the  moral  justice  of  God  by 
supposing  him  to  make  the  innocent  suffer  for  the  guilty, 
and  also  the  loose  morality  and  low  contrivance  of  sup- 
posing him  to  change  himself  into  the  shape  of  a  man, 
in  order  to  make  an  excuse  to  himself  for  not  executing 
his  supposed  sentence  upon  Adam  —  putting,  I  say,  those 


AGE  OF   REASON.  43 

things  aside  as  matter  of  distinct  consideration,  it  is  cer- 
tain that  what  is  called  the  Christian  system  of  faith,  in- 
cluding in  it  the  whimsical  account  of  the  creation — the 
strange  story  of  Eve — the  snake  and  the  apple — the 
ambiguous  idea  of  a  man-god — the  corporeal  idea  of  the 
death  of  a  god  —  the  mythological  idea  of  a  family  of 
gods,  and  the  Christian  system  of  arithmetic,  that  tlire^ 
are  one,  and  one  is  three,  are  all  irreconcilable,  not  only 
to  the  divine  gift  of  reason  that  God  hath  given  to  man, 
but  to  the  knowledge  that  man  gains  of  the  power  and 
wisdom  of  God,  by  the  aid  of  the  sciences  and  by  studying 
the  structure  of  the  universe  that  God  has  made. 

The  setters-up,  therefore,  and  the  advocates  of  the 
Christian  system  of  faith  could  not  but  foresee  that  the 
continually  progressive  knowledge  that  man  would  gain, 
by  the  aid  of  science,  of  the  power  and  wisdom  of  God, 
manifested  in  the  structure  of  the  universe  and  in  all  the 
works  of  Creation,  would  militate  against,  and  call  into 
question,  the  truth  of  their  system  of  faith  ;  and  there- 
fore it  became  necessary  to  their  purpose  to  cut  learning 
down  to  a  size  less  dangerous  to  their  project,  and  this 
they  effected  by  restricting  the  idea  of  learning  to  the 
dead  study  of  dead  languages. 

They  not  only  rejected  the  study  of  science  out  of  the 
Christian  schools,-  but  they  persecuted  it,  and  it  is  only 
within  about  the  last  two  centuries  that  the  study  has 
been  revived.  So  late  as  1610,  Galileo,  a  Florentine, 
discovered  and  introduced  the  use  of  telescopes,  and  by 
applying  them  to  observe  the  motions  and  appearances 
of  the  heavenly  bodies,  afforded  additional  means  for  as- 
certaining the  true  structure  of  the  universe.  Instead  of 
being  esteemed  for  those  discoveries,  he  was  sentenced  to 
renounce  them,  or  the  opinions  resulting  from  them,  as 
a  damnable  heresy.  And,  prior  to  that  time,  Vigilius 
was  condemned  to  be  burned  for  asserting  the  antipodes, 
or  in  other  words  that  the  earth  was  a  globe,  and  hab- 


44 


AGE  OF   REASON. 


itable  in  every  part  where  there  was  land  ;  yet  the  truth  ot 
this  is  now  too  well  known  even  to  be  told. 

If  the  belief  of  errors  not  morally  bad  did  no  mischief, 
it  would  make  no  part  of  the  moral  duty  of  man  to 
oppose  and  remove  them.  There  was  no  moral  ill  in 
believing  the  earth  was  flat  like  a  trencher,  any  more 
than  there  was  moral  virtue  in  believing  that  it  was  round 
like  a  globe ;  neither  was  there  any  moral  ill  in  believing 
that  the  Creator  made  no  other  world  than  this,  any 
more  than  there  was  moral  virtue  in  believing  that  he 
made  millions,  and  that  the  infinity  of  space  is  filled 
with  worlds.  But  when  a  system  of  religion  is  made  to 
grow  out  of  a  supposed  system  of  creation  that  is  not 
true,  and  to  unite  itself  therewith  in  a  manner  almost 
inseparable  therefrom,  the  case  assumes  an  entirely  dif- 
ferent ground.  It  is  then  that  errors  not  morally  bad 
become  fraught  with  the  same  mischiefs  as  if  they  were. 
Itis  then  that  the  truth,  though  otherwise  indiflferent  itself, 
becomes  an  essential,  by  becoming  the  criterion  that  either 
confirms  by  corresponding  evidence,  or  denies  by  con- 
tradictory evidence,  the  reality  of  the  religion  itself.  In 
this  view  of  the  case,  it  is  the  moral  duty  of  man  to  ob- 
tain every  possible  evidence  that  the  structure  of  the 
heavens,  or  any  other  part  of  creation  affords,  with  respect 
to  systems  of  religion.  But  this,  the  supporters  or 
partisans  of  the  Christian  system,  as  if  dreading  the  re- 
sult, incessantly  opposed,  and  not  only  rejected  the 
sciences,  but  persecuted  the  professors.  Had  Newton  or 
Descartes  lived  three  or  four  hundred  years  ago,  and 
pursued  their  studies  as  they  did,  it  is  most  probable 
they  would  not  have  lived  to  finish  them  ;  and  had 
Franklin  drawn  lightning  from  the  clouds  at  the  same 
time,  it  would  have  been  at  the  hazard  of  expiring  for  it 
in  the  flames. 

Later  times  have  laid  all  the  blame  upon  the  Goths 
and  Vandals  ;  but,  however  unwilling  the  partisans  of 


AGE   OF    REASON.  45 

the  Christian  system  may  be  to  believe  or  to  acknowledge 
it,  it  is  nevertheless  true  that  the  a«^e  of  ignorance  com- 
menced with  the  Christian  system.  There  was  more 
knowledge  in  the  world  before  that  period  than  for  many 
centuries  afterwards  ;  and  as  to  religions  knowledge,  the 
Christian  system,  as  already  said  was  only  another 
species  of  mythology,  and  the  mythology  to  which  it 
succeeded  was  a  corruption  of  an  ancient  system  of 
theism.* 

It  is  owing  to  this  long  interregnum  of  science,  and 
io  no  other  cause^  that  we  have  now  to  look  through  a 
vast  chasm  of  many  hundred  years  to  the  respectable 
characters  we  call  the  ancients.  Had  the  progression  of 
knowledge  gone  on  proportionably  with  that  stock  that 
before  existed,  that  chasm  would  have  been  filled  up 
with  characters  rising  superior  in  knowledge  to  each 
other  ;  and  those  ancients  we  now  so  much  admire  would 
have  appeared  respectably  in  the  background  of  the 
scene.  But  the  Christian  system  laid  all  waste  ;  and  if 
we  take  our  stand  about  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth 
century,  we  look  back  through  that  long  chasm  to  the 
times  of  the  ancients,  as  over  a  vast  sandy  desert,  in 

•It  is  impossible  for  us  now  to  know  at  what  time  the  heathen  mythology  began  ; 
bat  it  is  certain,  from  the  internal  evidence  that  it  carries,  that  it  did  not  begin  in  the 
same  state  or  condition  in  which  it  ended.  All  the  gods  of  that  mythology,  except 
Saturn,  were  of  modern  invention.  The  supposed  reig^  of  Saturn  was  prior  to  that 
which  is  called  the  heathen  mythology,  and  was  so  far  a  species  of  theism,  that  it  ad< 
mitted  the  belief  of  only  one  God.  Saturn  is  supposed  to  have  abdicated  the  govern- 
ment in  favor  of  his  three  sons  and  one  daughter,  Jupiter,  Pluto,  Neptune,  and  Juno  ; 
afler  this,  thousands  of  other  Gods  and  demi-gods  were  imaginarily  created,  and  the 
calendar  of  gods  increased  as  fast  as  the  calendar  of  saints  and  the  calendars  of  court* 
have  increased  since. 

All  the  corruptions  that  have  taken  place  in  theology  and  in  religion,  have  been 
produced  by  admitting  of  what  man  calls  revealed  religion.  The  M\thologists  pre- 
tended to  more  revealed  religion  than  the  Christians  do.  They  had  their  oracles  and 
their  priests,  who  were  supposed  to  receive  and  deliver  the  word  of  God  verbally,  oii 
almost  all  occasions. 

Since,  then,  all  corruptions,  down  from  Moloch  to  modem  predestinarianism,  and 
the  human  sacrifices  of  the  heathens  to  the  Christian  sacrifice  of  the  Creator,  have 
been  produced  by  admitting  of  what  is  called  revealed  relig-ion  ,t'ht  most  effectual  means 
to  prevent  all  such  evils  and  impositions  is  not  to  admit  of  any  other  revelation  than 
that  which  iHrnmiifested  iit  the  b<x)k()f  creation,  and  to  contemplate  the  creation  as 
the  only  true  and  real  word  of  God  that  ever  did  or  evor  will  exist ;  and  that  every- 
thing else,  called  the  word  of  Uod,  is  fable  and  imposition. 


46  AGE   OF   REASON. 

which  not  a  shrub  appears  to  intercept  the  vision  to  the 
fertile  hills  beyond. 

It  is  an  inconsistency  scarcely  possible  to  be  credited, 
that  anything^  should  exist,  under  the  name  of  a  religion, 
that  held  it  to  be  irreligious  to  study  and  contemplate 
the  structure  of  the  universe  that  God  has  made.  But 
the  fact  is  too  well  established  to  be  denied.  The  event 
that  served  more  than  any  other  to  break  the  first  link 
in  this  long  chain  of  despotic  ignorance  is  that  known  by 
the  name  of  the  Reformation  by  Luther.  From  that 
time,  though  it  does  not  appear  to  have  made  any  part  of 
the  intention  of  Luther,  or  of  those  who  are  called  re- 
formers, the  sciences  began  to  revive,  and  liberality, 
their  natural  associate,  began  to  appear.  This  was  the 
only  public  good  the  Reformation  did  ;  for  with  respect 
to  religious  good,  it  might  as  well  not  have  taken  place. 
The  mythology  still  continued  the  same,  and  a  mul- 
tiplicity of  National  Popes  grew  out  of  the  downfall  of 
the  Pope  of  Christendom. 

Having  thus  shown  from  the  internal  evidence  of 
things  the  cause  that  produced  a  change  in  the  state  of 
learning,  and  the  molive  for  substituting  the  study  of  the 
dead  languages  in  the  place  of  the  sciences,  I  proceed,  in 
addition  to  several  observations  already  made  in  the 
former  part  of  this  work,  to  compare,  or  rather  to  con- 
front, the  evidence  that  the  structure  of  the  universe  af- 
fords with  the  Christian  system  of  religion  ;  but,  as  I 
cannot  begin  this  part  better  than  by  referring  to  the 
ideas  that  occurred  to  me  at  an  early  part  of  life,  and 
which  I  doubt  not  have  occurred  in  some  degree  to  al- 
most every  person  at  one  time  or  other,  I  shall  state 
what  those  ideas  were,  and  add  thereto  such  other  matter 
as  shall  arise  out  of  the  subject,  giving  to  the  whole,  by 
way  of  preface,  a  short  introduction. 

My  father  being  of  the  Quaker  profession,  it  was  my 
good  fortune  to  have  an  exceedingly  good  moral  edu- 


AGR  OF   REASON.  47 

cation,  and  a  tolerable  stock  of  useful  learning.  Though 
I  went  to  the  grammar  school,*  I  did  not  learn  Latin, 
not  only  because  I  had  no  inclination  to  learn  languages, 
but  because  of  the  objection  the  Quakers  have  against 
the  books  in  which  the  language  is  taught.  But  this 
did  not  prevent  me  from  being  acquainted  with  the  sub- 
ject of  all  the  Latin  books  used  in  the  school. 

The  natural  bent  of  my  mind  was  to  science.  I  had 
some  turn,  and  I  believe  some  talent,  for  poetry  ;  but 
this  I  rather  repressed  than  encouraged,  as  leading  too 
much  into  the  field  of  imagination.  As  soon  as  I  was 
able  I  purchased  a  pair  of  globes,  and  attended  the 
philosophical  lectures  of  Martin  and  Ferguson,  and  be- 
came afterward  acquainted  with  Dr.  Bevis,  of  the  society 
called  the  Royal  Society,  theu  living  in  the  Temple,  and 
an  excellent  astronomer. 

I  had  no  disposition  for  what  is  called  politics.  It  pre- 
sented to  my  mind  no  other  idea  than  as  contained  in  the 
word  Jockeyship.  When  therefore,  I  turned  my  thoughts 
toward  matter  of  government,  I  had  to  form  a  system 
for  myself  that  accorded  with  the  moral  and  philosophic 
principles  in  which  I  have  been  educated.  I  saw,  or  at 
least  I  thought  I  saw,  a  vast  scene  opening  itself  to  the 
world  in  the  affairs  of  America,  and  it  appeared  to  me 
that  unless  the  Americans  changed  the  plan  they  were 
pursuing  with  respect  to  the  government  of  England,  and 
declared  themselves  independent,  they  would  not  only 
involve  themselves  in  a  multiplicity  of  new  difficulties, 
but  shut  out  the  prospect  that  was  then  oflfering  itself  to 
mankind  through  their  means.  It  was  from  these  motives 
that  I  published  the  work  known  by  the  name  of  Com- 
mon Sense^  which  was  the  first  work  I  ever  did  pub- 
lish ;  and  so  far  as  I  can  judge  of  myself,  I  believe  I 
should  never  have  been  known  in  the  world  as  an  author, 

*Tbe  f=ainc  school,  Thetford  in  Norfolk  that  the  present  Counsellor  MIngay  went 
to  and  under  the  same  mobter. 


48  AGE   OF    REASON. 

on  any  subject  whatever,  had  it  not  been  for  the  affairs 
of  America.  I  wrote  Common  Sense  the  latter  end  of 
the  year  1775,  and  published  it  the  first  of  January,  1776. 
Independence  was  declared  the  fourth  of  July  following. 

Any  person  who  has  made  observations  on  the  state 
and  progress  of  the  human  mind,  by  observing  his  own, 
cannot  but  have  observed  that  there  are  two  distinct 
classes  of  what  are  called  thoughts  —  those  that  we  pro- 
duce in  ourselves  by  reflection  and  the  act  of  thinkings 
and  those  that  bolt  into  the  mind  of  their  own  accord. 
I  have  always  made  it  a  rule  to  treat  those  voluntary 
visitors  with  civility,  taking  care  to  examine,  as  well  as  I 
was  able,  if  they  were  worth  entertaining,  and  it  is  from 
them  I  have  acquired  almost  all  the  knowledge  that  I 
have.  As  to  the  learning  that  any  person  gains  from 
school  education,  it  serves  only,  like  a  small  capital,  to  put 
him  in  a  way  of  beginning  learning  for  himself  afterward. 
Every  person  of  learning  is  finally  his  own  teacher,  the 
reason  of  which  is  that  principles,  being  a  distinct  quality 
to  circumstances,  cannot  be  impressed  upon  the  memory; 
their  place  of  mental  residence  is  the  understanding  and 
they  are  never  so  lasting  as  when  they  begin  by  con- 
ception.    Thus  much  for  the  introductory  part. 

From  the  time  I  was  capable  of  conceiving  an  idea  and 
acting  upon  it  by  reflection,  I  either  doubted  the  truth 
of  the  Christian  system  or  thought  it  to  be  a  strange  af- 
fair ;  I  scarcely  knew  which  it  was,  but  I  well  remember, 
when  about  seven  or  eight  years  of  age,  hearing  a  sermon 
read  by  a  relation  of  mine,  who  was  a  great  devotee  of 
the  Church,  upon  the  subject  of  what  is  called  re- 
demption by  the  death  of  the  Son  of  God.  After  the 
sermon  was  ended,  I  went  into  the  garden,  and  as  I  was 
going  down  the  garden  steps  (for  I  perfectly  recollect  the 
spot)  I  revolted  at  the  recollection  of  what  I  had  heard, 
and  thought  to  myself  that  it  was  making  God  Almighty 


AGE  OF   REASON.  49 

act  like  a  passionate  man,  that  killed  his  son  when  he 
could  not  revenge  himself  in  any  other  way,  and  as  I 
was  sure  a  man  would  be  hanged  that  did  such  a  thing, 
I  could  not  see  for  what  purpose  they  preached  such 
sermons.  This  was  not  one  of  that  kind  of  thoughts 
that  had  anything  in  it  of  childish  levity;  it  was  to  me 
a  serious  reflection,  arising  from  the  idea  I  had  that  God 
was  too  good  to  do  such  an  action,  and  also  too  almighty 
to  be  under  any  necessity  of  doing  it.  I  believe  in  the 
same  manner  at  this  moment ;  and  I  moreover  believe, 
that  any  system  of  religion  that  has  anything  in  it  that 
shocks  the  mind  of  a  child,  cannot  be  a  true  system. 

It  seems  as  if  parents  of  the  Christian  profession  were 
ashamed  to  tell  their  children  anything  about  the  prin- 
ciples of  their  religion.  They  sometimes  instruct  them 
in  morals,  and  talk  to  them  of  the  goodness  of  what  they 
call  Providence,  for  the  Christian  mythology  has  five 
deities  —  there  is  God  the  Father,  God  the  Son,  God  the 
Holy  Ghost,  the  God  Providence,  and  the  Goddess  Na- 
ture. But  the  Christian  story  of  God  the  Father  put- 
ting his  son  to  death,  or  employing  people  to  do  it  (for 
that  is  the  plain  language  of  the  story)  cannot  be  told  by 
a  parent  to  a  child ;  and  to  tell  him  that  it  was  done  to 
make  mankind  happier  and  better  is  making  the  story 
still  worse — as  if  mankind  could  be  improved  by  the 
example  of  murder ;  and  to  tell  him  that  all  this  is  a 
mystery  is  only  making  an  excuse  for  the  incredibility 
of  it 

How  different  is  this  to  the  pure  and  simple  profession 
of  Deism  !  The  true  Deist  has  but  one  Deity,  and  his 
religion  consists  in  contemplating  the  power,  wisdom, 
and  benignity  of  the  Deity  in  his  works,  and  in  en- 
deavoring to  imitate  him  in  everything  moral,  scien- 
tiifical,  and  mechanical. 

The  religion  that  approaches  the  nearest  of  all  others 
to  true   Deism,  in  the  moral  and  benign  part  thereof, 


50  AGE  OF   REASON. 

is  that  professed  by  the  Quakers ;  but  they  have  con- 
tracted themselves  too  much,  by  leaving  the  works  of 
God  out  of  their  system.  Though  I  reverence  their 
philanthropy,  I  cannot  help  smiling  at  the  conceit,  that 
if  the  taste  of  a  Quaker  could  have  been  consulted  at  the 
creation,  what  a  silent  and  drab-colored  creation  it  would 
have  been  !  Not  a  flower  would  have  blossomed  its 
ga3/eties,  nor  a  bird  been  permitted  to  sing. 

Quitting  these  reflections,  I  proceed  to  other  matters. 
After  I  had  made  myself  master  of  the  use  of  the  globes 
and  of  the  orrery,*  and  conceived  an  idea  of  the  infinity 
of  space,  and  the  eternal  divisibility  of  matter,  and  ob- 
tained at  least  a  general  knowledge  of  what  is  called 
natural  philosophy,  I  began  to  compare,  or,  as  I  have  be- 
fore said,  to  confront  the  eternal  evidence  those  things 
afford  with  the  Christian  system  of  faith. 

Though  it  is  not  a  direct  article  of  the  Christian 
system,  that  this  world  that  we  inhabit  is  the  whole  of 
the  habitable  creation,  yet  it  is  so  worked  up  therewith, 
from  what  is  called  the  Mosaic  account  of  the  Creation, 
the  stor)^'  of  Eve  and  the  apple,  and  the  counterpart  of 
that  story,  the  death  of  the  Son  of  God,  that  to  believe 
otherwise,  that  is,  to  believe  that  God  created  a  plurality 
of  w^orlds,  at  least  as  numerous  as  what  we  call  stars, 
renders  the  Christian  system  of  faith  at  once  little  and 
ridiculous,  and  scatters  it  in  the  mind  like  feathers  in 
the  air.  The  two  beliefs  cannot  be  held  together  in  the 
same  mind,  and  he  who  thinks  that  he  believes  both, 
has  thought  but  little  of  either. 

Though  the  belief  of  a  plurality  of  worlds  was  familiar 

♦As  this  book  may  fall  into  the  hands  of  persons  who  do  not  know  what  an  orrery  is, 
it  is  for  their  information  I  add  this  note,  as  the  name  gives  no  idea  of  the  uses  of  the 
thing  The  orrery  has  its  name  from  the  person  who  invented  it.  It  is  a  machinery 
of  clock-work,  representing  the  universe  in  miniature,  and  in  which  the  revolution  ot 
the  earth  round  itself  and  round  the  sun.  the  revolution  of  the  moon  round  the  earth, 
the  revolution  of  the  planets  round  the  snn  their  relative  distances  from  the  snn, 
as  the  centre  of  the  whole  svstem  .  their  relative  distances  from  each  other,  and  their 
different  magnitudes,  are  represented  as  they  really  exist  in  what  we  call  the  heavens. 


AGE  OF   REASON.  $1 

to  the  ancients,  it  is  only  within  the  last  three  centuries 
that  the  extent  and  dimensions  of  this  globe  that  we  in- 
habit have  been  ascertained.  Several  vessels,  following 
the  tract  of  the  ocean,  have  sailed  entirely  round  the 
world,  as  a  man  may  march  in  a  circle,  and  come  round 
by  the  contrary  side  of  the  circle  to  the  spot  he  set  out 
from.  The  circular  dimensions  of  our  world,  in  the 
widest  part,  as  a  man  would  measure  the  widest  round  of 
an  apple  or  ball,  is  only  twenty-five  thousand  and  twenty 
English  miles,  reckoning  sixty-nine  miles  and  a  half  to 
an  equatorial  degree,  and  may  be  sailed  round  in  the 
space  of  about  three  years.  * 

A  world  of  this  extent  may,  at  first  thought,  appear 
to  us  to  be  great ;  but  if  we  compare  it  with  the  im- 
mensity of  space  in  which  it  is  suspended,  like  a  bubble 
or  balloon  in  the  air,  it  is  infinitely  less  in  proportion 
than  the  smallest  grain  of  sand  is  to  the  size  of  the  world, 
or  the  finest  particle  of  dew  to  the  whole  ocean,  and  is 
therefore  but  small ;  and,  as  will  be  hereafter  shown,  is 
only  one  of  a  system  of  worlds  of  which  the  universal 
creation  is  composed. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  gain  some  faint  idea  of  the  im- 
mensity of  space  in  which  this  and  all  the  other  worlds 
are  suspended,  if  we  follow  a  progression  of  ideas.  When 
we  think  of  the  size  or  dimensions  of  a  room,  our  ideas 
limit  themselves  to  the  walls,  and  there  they  stop ;  but 
when  our  eye  or  our  imagination  darts  into  space,  that  is, 
when  it  looks  upward  into  what  we  call  the  open  air,  we 
cannot  conceive  any  walls  or  boundaries  it  can  have,  and 
if  for  the  sake  of  resting  our  ideas,  we  suppose  a  boundary, 
the  question  immediately  renews  itself,  and  asks,  what 
is  beyond  that  boundary?  and  in  the  same  manner,  what 
is  beyond  the  next  boundary?  and  so  on  till  the  fatigued 
imagination  returns  and  says.  There  is  no  end.    Certainly, 

•  AUowiii);  a  ship  to  sail  on  an  average,  three  miles  in  an  hour,  she  would  sail  en- 
tirely round  the  world  in  less  than  one  year,  if  she  could  sail  in  a  direct  circle;  but 
«be  Mobliged  to  follow  the  course  of  the  ocean. 


^2  AGE   OF    REASON. 

then,  the  Creator  was  not  pent  for  room  when  hr  made 
this  world  no  larger  than  it  is,  and  we  have  to  seek  the 
reason  in  something  else. 

If  we  take  a  survey  of  our  own  world,  or  rather  of  this, 
of  which  the  Creator  has  given  us  the  use  as  our  portion 
in  the  immense  system  of  creation,  we  find  every  part  of 
it — the  earth,  the  waters,  and  the  air  thai  surrounds  it 
—  filled  and,  as  it  were,  crowded  with  life,  down  from 
the  largest  animals  that  we  know  of  to  the  smallest  in- 
sects the  naked  eye  can  behold,  and  from  thence  to 
others  still  smaller,  and  totally  invisible  without  the  as- 
sistance of  the  microscope.  Every  tree,  every  plant, 
every  leaf,  serves  not  only  as  a  habitation  but  as  a  world 
to  some  numerous  race,  till  animal  existence  becomes  so 
exceedingly  refined  that  the  effluvia  of  a  blade  of  grass 
would  be  food  for  thousands. 

Since,  then,  no  part  of  our  earth  is  left  unoccupied, 
why  is  it  to  be  supposed  that  the  immensity  of  space  is 
a  naked  void,  lying  in  eternal  waste?  There  is  room 
for  millions  of  worlds  as  large  or  larger  than  ours,  and 
each  of  them  millions  of  miles  apart  from  each  other. 

Having  now  arrived  at  this  point,  if  we  carry  our 
ideas  only  one  thought  further,  we  shall  see,  perhaps,  the 
true  reason,  at  least  a  very  good  reason,  for  our  happi- 
ness, why  the  Creator,  instead  of  makiug  one  immense 
world  extending  over  an  immense  quantity  of  space,  has 
preferred  dividing  that  quantity  of  matter  into  several 
distinct  and  separate  worlds,  which  we  call  planets,  of 
which  our  earth  is  one.  But  before  I  explain  my  ideas 
upon  this  subject,  it  is  necessary  (not  for  the  sake  of  those 
who  already  know,  but  for  those  who  do  not)  to  show 
^wha.t  the  system  of  the  universe  is . 

That  part  of  the  universe  that  is  called  the  solar 
system  (meaning  the  system  of  worlds  to  which  our  earth 
belongs,  and  of  which  Sol,  or  in  English  language,  the 
Sun,  is  the  centre)  consists,  besides  the  Sun,  of  six  dis- 


AGK   OF   REASON.  53 

tinct  orbs,  or  planets,  or  worlds,  besides  the  secondary- 
bodies,  called  the  satellites  or  moons,  of  which  our 
earth  has  one  that  attends  her  in  her  annual  revolution 
around  the  Sun,  in  like  manner  as  the  other  satellites  or 
moons  attend  the  planets  or  worlds  to  which  they  sev- 
erally belong,  as  may  be  seen  by  the  assistance  of  the 
telescope. 

The  Sun  is  the  centre,  round  which  those  six  worlds 
or  planets  revolve  at  dififerent  distances  therefrom,  and  in 
circles  concentrate  to  each  other.  Each  world  keeps 
constantly  in  nearly  the  same  track  round  the  Sun,  and 
continues,  at  the  same  time,  turning  round  itself  in 
nearly  an  upright  position,  as  a  top  turns  round  itself 
when  it  is  spinning  on  the  ground,  and  leans  a  little 
sideways. 

It  is  this  leaning  of  the  earth  (23^  degprees)  that  oc- 
casions summer  and  winter,  and  the  dififerent  length  of 
days  and  nights.  If  the  earth  turned  round  itself  in  a 
position  perpendicular  to  the  plane  or  level  of  the  circle 
it  moves  in  around  the  Sun,  as  a  top  turns  round  when 
it  stands  erect  on  the  ground,  the  days  and  nights  would 
be  always  of  the  same  length,  twelve  hours  day  and 
twelve  hours  night,  and  the  seasons  would  be  uniformly 
the  same  throughout  the  year. 

Every  time  that  a  planet  (our  earth  for  example)  turns 
round  itself,  it  makes  what  we  call  day  and  night ;  and 
every  time  it  goes  entirely  round  the  Sun  it  makes  what 
we  call  a  year  ;  consequently  our  world  turns  three  hun- 
dred and  sixty-five  times  round  itself,  in  going  once 
round  the  Sun.  * 

The  names  that  the  ancients  gave  to  those  six  worlds, 
and  which  are  still  called  by  the  same  names,  are  Mer- 
cury, Venus,  this  world  that  we  call  ours,  Mars,  Jupiter, 

•Those  who  supposed  that  the  sun  went  round  the  earth  every  34  hours  made  the 
same  mistake  in  idea  that  a  cook  would  do  in  fact,  that  should  make  the  fire  go  round 
the  meat,  instead  of  the  meat  turning  round  itself  toward  the  fire. 


54  AGK  OF   REASON. 

and  Saturn .  They  appear  larger  to  the  eye  than  the  stars, 
being  many  million  miles  nearer  to  our  earth  than  any 
of  the  stars  are.  The  planet  Venus  is  that  which  is 
called  the  evening  star,  and  sometimes  the  morning  star, 
as  she  happens  to  set  after  or  rise  before  the  Sun,  which 
in  either  case  is  never  more  than  three  hours. 

The  Sun,  as  before  said,  being  the  centre,  the  planet 
or  world  nearest  the  Sun  is  Mercury ;  his  distance  from 
the  Sun  is  thirty-four  million  miles,  and  he  moves  round 
in  a  circle  always  at  that  distance  from  the  Sun,  as  a 
top  may  be  supposed  to  spin  round  in  the  track  in  which 
a  horse  goes  in  a  mill.  The  second  world  is  Venus  ;  she 
is  fifty-seven  million  miles  distant  from  the  Sun,  and 
consequently  moves  round  in  a  circle  much  greater  than 
that  of  Mercury.  The  third  world  is  this  that  we  inhabit, 
and  which  is  eighty-eight  million  miles  distant  from  the 
Sun,  and  consequently  moves  round  in  a  circle  greater  than 
that  of  Venus.  The  fourth  world  is  Mars  ;  he  is  distant 
from  the  Sun  one  hundred  and  thirty-four  million  miles, 
and  consequently  moves  round  in  a  circle  greater  than  that 
of  our  earth.  The  fifth  is  Jupiter;  he  is  distant  from 
the  Sun  five  hundred  and  fifty-seven  million  miles,  and 
consequently  moves  round  in  a  circle  greater  than  that 
of  Mars.  The  sixth  world  is  Saturn  ;  he  is  distant  from 
the  Sun  seven  hundred  and  sixty-three  million  miles, 
and  consequently  moves  round  in  a  circle  that  sur- 
rounds the  circles,  or  orbits,  of  all  the  other  worlds  or 
planets. 

The  space,  therefore,  in  the  air,  or  in  the  immensity 
of  space,  that  our  solar  system  takes  up  for  the  several 
worlds  to  perform  their  revolutions  in  round  the  Sun,  is 
of  the  extent  in  a  straight  line  of  the  whole  diameter  of 
the  orbit  or  circle,  in  which  Saturn  moves  round  the  Sun, 
which  being  double  his  distance  from  the  Sun,  is  fifteen 
hundred  and  twenty-six  million  miles  and  its  circular 
extent  is  nearly  five  thousand  million,  and  its  globular 


AGE  OF  REASON.  55 

contents  is  almost  three  thousand  five  hundred  million 
times  three  thousand  five  hundred  million  square  miles.  * 

But  this,  immense  as  it  is,  is  only  one  system  of  worlds. 
Beyond  this,  at  a  vast  distance  into  space,  far  beyond  all 
power  of  calculation,  are  the  stars  called  the  fixed  stars. 
They  are  called  fixed,  because  they  have  no  revolutionary 
ntotion,  as  the  six  worlds  or  planets  have  that  I  have 
been  describing.  Those  fixed  stars  continue  always  at 
the  same  distance  from  each  other,  and  always  in  the 
same  place,  as  the  Sun  does  in  the  centre  of  our  system. 
The  probability,  therefore,  is,  that  each  of  those  fixed 
stars  is  also  a  Sun,  round  which  another  system  of  worlds 
or  planets,  though  too  remote  for  us  to  discover,  per- 
forms its  revolutions,  as  our  system  of  worlds  does  round 
our  central  Sun. 

By  this  easy  progression  of  ideas,  the  immensity  of 
space  will  appear  to  us  to  be  filled  with  systems  of  worlds, 
and  that  no  part  of  space  lies  at  waste,  any  more  than 
any  part  of  the  globe  of  earth  and  water  is  left  unoccupied. 

Having  thus  endeavored  to  convey,  in  a  familiar  and 
easy  manner,  some  idea  of  the  structure  of  the  universe, 
I  return  to  explain  what  I  before  alluded  to,  namely,  the 
great  benefits  arising  to  man  in  consequence  of  the 
Creator  having  made  a  plurality  of  worlds,  such  as  our 
system  is,  consisting  of  a  central  Sun  and  six  worlds,  be- 
sides satellites,  in  preference  to  that  of  creating  one  world 
only  of  a  vast  extent. 

*  If  it  should  be  asked,  how  cnn  mnn  know  these  things?  I  have  one  plain  answer 
to  give,  which  is.  that  man  knows  how  to  calculate  an  eclipse,  and  also  how  to  calcu- 
late to  a  minute  of  time  when  the  planet  Venus,  in  making  her  revnlutions  around  the 
sun  will  come  in  a  straight  line  between  our  earth  and  the  sun,  and  will  appear  to  us 
about  thi;  size  oT a  large  pea  passing  across  the  face  of  the  sun.  This  happens  but 
twice  In  about  a  hundred  years,  at  the  distance  of  about  eight  years  from  each  other, 
and  h:is  happened  twice  in  our  time,  both  of  which  were  foreknown  by  calculation, 
tt  can  also  be  known  when  they  will  happen  a^ain  for  a  thousand  years  to  come,  or  to 
any  other  portion  of  time.  As.  therefore,  man  could  not  be  able  to  do  tlics"  things 
if  he  did  not  understand  the  solar  system,  and  the  mat)ner  in  which  the  revolutions  of 
the  several  nianets  or  worlds  are  performed  the  fact  of  calcnlatingan  eclinse  or  a 
transit  of  Venus,  is  a  proof  in  point  that  the  knowledge  exists;  and  as  to  a  few 
thousand,  or  even  a  few  million  miles,  more  or  less,  it  makes  scarcely  any  sensible  dif- 
ference in  such  immense  distances. 


56  AGE   OF   REASON. 

It  is  an  idea  I  have  never  lost  sight  of,  that  all  our 
knowledge  of  science  is  derived  from  the  revolutions  (ex- 
hibited to  our  eye  and  from  thence  to  our  understanding) 
which  those  several  planets  or  worlds  of  which  our 
system  is  composed  make  in  their  circuit  round  the  Sun. 

Had,  then,  the  quantity  of  matter  which  these  six 
worlds  contain  been  blended  into  one  solitary  globe,  the 
consequence  to  us  would  have  been,  that  either  no  revolu- 
tionary motion  would  have  existed,  or  not  a  sufficiency 
of  it  to  give  to  us  the  idea  and  the  knowledge  of  science 
we  now  have  ;  and  it  is  from  the  sciences  that  all  the 
mechanical  arts  that  contribute  so  much  to  our  earthly 
felicity  and  comfort  are  derived. 

As,  therefore,  the  Creator  made  nothing  in  vain,  so 
also  must  it  be  believed  that  he  organized  the  structure 
of  the  universe  in  the  most  advantageous  manner  for 
the  benefit  of  man ;  and  as  we  see,  and  from  ex- 
perience feel,  the  benefits  we  derive  from  the  structure  of 
the  universe  formed  as  it  is,  which  benefits  we  should  not 
have  had  the  opportunity  of  enjoying,  if  the  structure, 
so  far  as  relates  to  our  system,  had  been  a  solitary  globe 
—  we  can  discover  at  least  one  reason  why  2,  plurality  of 
worlds  has  been  made,  and  that  reason  calls  forth  the  de- 
votional gratitude  of  man,  as  well  as  his  admiration. 

But  it  is  not  to  us,  the  inhabitants  of  this  globe,  only, 
that  the  benefits  arising  from  a  plurality  of  worlds  are 
limited.  The  inhabitants  of  each  of  the  worlds  of  which 
our  system  is  composed  enjoy  the  same  opportunities  of 
knowledge  as  we  do.  They  behold  the  revolutionary- 
motions  of  our  earth,  as  we  behold  theirs.  All  the 
planets  revolve  in  sight  of  each  other,  and,  there- 
fore, the  same  universal  school  of  science  presents  itself 
to  all. 

Neither  does  the  knowledge  stop  here.  The  system  of 
worlds  next  to  us  exhibits,  in  its  revolutions,  the  same 
principles  and  school  of  science  to   the  inhabitants  of 


AGE  OF   REASON.  57 

their  system,  as  our  system  does  to  us,  and  in  like  man- 
ner throughout  the  immensity  of  space. 

Our  ideas,  not  only  of  the  almightiness  of  the  Creator, 
but  of  his  wisdom  and  his  beneficence,  become  enlarged 
in  proportion  as  we  contemplate  the  extent  and  the 
structure  of  the  universe.  The  solitary  idea  of  a  solitary 
world,  rolling  or  at  rest  in  the  immense  ocean  of  space, 
gives  place  to  the  cheerful  idea  of  a  society  of  worlds, 
so  happily  contrived  as  to  administer,  even  by  their  mo- 
tion, instruction  to  man.  We  see  our  own  earth  filled 
with  abundance,  but  we  forget  to  consider  how  much  of 
that  abundance  is  owing  to  the  scientific  knowledge  the 
vast  machinery  of  the  universe  has  unfolded. 

But,  in  the  midst  of  those  reflections,  what  are  we  to 
think  of  the  Christian  system  of  faith,  that  forms  itself 
upon  the  idea  of  only  one  world,  and  that  of  no  greater 
extent,  as  is  before  shown,  than  twenty-five  thousand 
miles?  An  extent  which  a  man  walking  at  the  rate  of 
three  miles  an  hour,  for  twelve  hours  in  the  day,  could 
he  keep  on  in  a  circular  direction,  would  walk  entirely 
round  in  less  than  two  years.  Alas !  what  is  this  to 
the  mighty  ocean  of  space,  and  the  almighty  power  of 
the  Creator? 

From  whence,  then,  could  arise  the  solitary  and 
strange  conceit  that  the  Almighty,  who  had  millions  of 
worlds  equally  dependent  on  his  protection,  should  quit 
the  care  of  all  the  rest,  and  come  to  die  in  our  world,  be- 
cause, they  say,  one  man  and  one  woman  had  eaten  an 
apple?  And,  on  the  other  hand,  are  we  to  suppose  that 
every  world  in  the  boundless  creation  had  an  Eve,  an 
apple,  a  serpent,  and  a  redeemer  ?  In  this  case,  the  per- 
son who  is  irreverently  called  the  Son  of  God,  and  some- 
times God  himself,  would  have  nothing  else  to  do  than 
to  travel  from  world  to  world,  in  an  endless  succession 
of  deaths,  with  scarcely  a  momentary  interval  of  life. 

It  has  been  by  rejecting  the  evidence  that  the  word  or 


58  AGE  OF   REASON. 

works  of  God  in  the  creation  afford  to  our  senses,  and 
the  action  of  our  reason  upon  that  evidence,  that  so 
many  wild  and  whimsical  systems  of  faith  and  of  religion 
have  been  fabricated  and  set  up.  There  may  be  many 
systems  of  religion  that,  so  far  from  being  morally  bad, 
are  in  many  respects  morally  good  ;  but  there  can  be 
but  ONE  that  is  true  ;  and  that  one  necessarily  must,  as 
it  ever  will,  be  in  all  things  consistent  with  the  ever- 
existing  word  of  God  that  we  behold  in  his  works.  But 
such  is  the  strange  construction  of  the  Christian  system 
of  faith  that  every  evidence  the  Heavens  afford  to  man 
either  directly  contradicts  it  or  renders  it  absurd. 

It  is  possible  to  believe,  and  I  always  feel  pleasure  in 
encouraging  myself  to  believe  it,  that  there  have  been 
men  in  the  world  who  persuade  themselves  that  what  is 
called  a.  pious  /raud  might,  at  least  under  particular  cir- 
cumstances, be  productive  of  some  good.  But  the  fraud 
being  once  established,  could  not  afterward  be  explained, 
for  it  is  with  a  pious  fraud  as  with  a  bad  action,  it  begets 
a  calamitous  necessity  of  going  on. 

The  persons  who  first  preached  the  Christian  system  of 
faith,  and  in  some  measure  combined  it  with  the  morality 
preached  by  Jesus  Christ,  might  persuade  themselves 
that  it  was  better  than  the  heathen  mythology  that  then 
prevailed.  From  the  first  preachers  the  fraud  went  on 
to  the  second,  and  to  the  third,  till  the  idea  of  its  being 
a  pious  fraud  became  lost  in  the  belief  of  its  being  true  ; 
and  that  belief  became  again  encouraged  by  the  interests 
of  those  who  made  a  livelihood  by  preaching  it. 

But  though  such  a  belief  might  by  such  means  be 
rendered  almost  general  among  the  laity,  it  is  next  to 
impossible  to  account  for  the  continual  persecution 
carried  on  by  the  Church,  for  several  hundred  years, 
against  the  sciences  and  against  the  professors  of  science, 
if  the  Church  had  not  some  record  or  tradition  that  it 
was  originally  no  other  than  a  pious  fraud,  or  did  not 


AGE  OF   REASON.  59 

foresee  that  it  could  not  be  maintained  against  the  evi- 
dence that  the  structure  of  the  universe  aflforded. 

Having  thus  shown  the  irreconcilable  inconsistencies 
between  the  real  word  of  God  existing  in  the  universe, 
and  that  which  is  called  the  Word  of  God^  as  shown  to 
us  in  a  printed  book  that  any  man  might  make,  I  pro- 
ceed to  speak  of  the  three  principal  means  that  have  been 
employed  in  all  ages,  and  perhaps  in  all  countries,  to 
impose  upon  mankind. 

Those  three  means  are  Mystery,  Miracle,  and  Prophecy. 
The  two  first  are  incompatible  with  true  religion,  and 
the  third  ought  always  to  be  suspected. 

With  respect  to  mystery,  everything  we  behold  is,  in 
one  sense,  a  mystery  to  us.  Our  own  existence  is  a 
mysterj'  ;  the  whole  vegetable  world  is  a  mystery.  We 
cannot  account  how  it  is  that  an  acorn,  when  put  into 
the  ground,  is  made  to  develop  itself,  and  become  an  oak. 
We  know  not  how  it  is  that  the  seed  we  sow  unfolds  and 
multiplies  itself,  and  returns  to  us  such  an  abundant  in- 
terest for  so  small  a  capital. 

The  fact,  however,  as  distinct  from  the  operating 
cause,  is  not  a  mystery,  because  we  see  it,  and  we  know 
also  the  means  we  are  to  use,  which  is  no  other  than 
putting  the  seed  into  the  ground.  We  know,  therefore, 
as  much  as  is  necessary  for  us  to  know  ;  and  that  part  of 
the  operation  that  we  do  not  know,  and  which,  if  we  did, 
we  could  not  perform,  the  Creator  takes  upon  himself 
and  performs  it  for  us.  We  are,  therefore,  better  off  than 
if  we  had  been  let  into  the  secret,  and  left  to  do  it  for 
ourselves. 

But  though  every  created  thing  is,  in  this  sense,  a 
mystery,  the  word  mystery  cannot  be  applied  to  moral 
truths  any  more  than  obscurity  can  be  applied  to  light. 
The  God  in  whom  we  believe  is  a  God  of  moral  truth, 
and  not  a  God  of  mystery  or  obscurity.  Mystery  is  the 
antagonist  of  truth.     It  is  a  fog  of  human  invention,  that 


6o  AGE   OF    REASON. 

obscures  truth,  and  represents  it  in  distortion.  Truth 
never  envelops  itself  in  mystery,  and  the  mystery  in 
which  it  is  at  any  time  enveloped  is  the  work  of  its  an- 
tagonist, and  never  of  itself. 

Religion,  therefore,  being  the  belief  of  a  God  and  the 
practice  of  moral  truth,  cannot  have  connection  with 
mystery.  The  belief  of  a  God,  so  far  from  having  any- 
thing of  mystery  in  it,  is  of  all  beliefs  the  most  easy,  be- 
cause it  arises  to  us,  as  is  before  observed,  out  of  necessity. 
And  the  practice  of  moral  truth,  or,  in  other  words,  a 
practical  imitation  of  the  moral  goodness  of  God,  is  no 
other  than  our  acting  toward  each  other  as  he  acts  be- 
nignly toward  all.  We  cannot  serve  God  in  the  manner 
we  serve  those  who  cannot  do  without  such  service  ;  and, 
therefore,  the  only  idea  we  can  have  of  serving  God,  is 
that  of  contributing  to  the  happiness  of  the  living  crea- 
tion that  God  has  made.  This  cannot  be  done  by 
retiring  ourselves  from  the  society  of  the  world  and 
spending  a  recluse  life  in  selfish  devotion. 

The  very  nature  and  design  of  religion,  if  I  may  so  ex- 
press it,  prove  even  to  demonstration  that  it  must  be  free 
from  ever}'thing  of  mystery,  and  unencumbered  with 
everything  that  is  mysterious.  Religion,  considered  as 
a  duty,  is  incumbent  upon  every  living  soul  alike,  and, 
therefore,  must  be  on  a  level  with  the  understanding  and 
comprehension  of  all.  Man  does  not  learn  religion  as  he 
learns  the  secrets  and  mysteries  of  a  trade.  He  leams 
the  theory  of  religion  by  reflection.  It  arises  out  of  the 
action  of  his  own  mind  upon  the  things  which  he  sees, 
or  upon  what  he  may  happen  to  hear  or  to  read,  and  the 
practice  joins  itself  thereto. 

When  men,  whether  from  policy  or  pious  fraud,  set  up 
systems  of  religion  incompatible  with  the  word  or  works 
of  God  in  the  creation,  and  not  only  above,  but  repugnant 
to  human  comprehension,  they  were  under  the  necessity 
of  inventing  or  adopting  a  word  that  should  serve  as  a 


AGB  OF   REASON.  6l 

bar  to  all  questions,  inquiries  and  speculation.  The 
word  mystery  answered  tli;s  purpose,  and  thus  it  has 
happened  that  religion,  which  is  in  itself  without  mys- 
tery, has  been  corrupted  into  a  fog  of  mysteries. 

As  mystery  answered  all  general  purposes,  miracle  fol- 
lowed as  an  occasional  auxiliary.  The  fonner  served  to 
bewilder  the  mind,  the  latter  to  puzzle  the  senses.  The 
one  was  the  lingo,  the  other  the  legerdemain. 

But  before  going  further  into  this  subject,  it  will  be 
proper  to  inquire  what  is  to  be  understood  by  a  miracle. 

In  the  same  sense  that  everything  may  be  said  to  be 
a  mystery,  so  also  may  it  be  said  that  everything  is  a 
miracle,  and  that  no  one  thing  is  a  greater  miracle  than 
another.  The  elephant,  though  larger,  is  not  a  greater 
miracle  than  a  mite,  nor  a  mountain  a  greater  miracle 
than  an  atom.  To  an  almighty  power,  it  is  no  more 
difficult  to  make  tlie  one  than  the  other,  and  no  more 
difficult  to  make  millions  of  worlds  than  to  make  one. 
Everything,  therefore,  is  a  miracle,  in  one  sense,  whilst 
in  the  other  sense,  there  is  no  such  thing  as  a  miracle. 
It  is  a  miracle  when  compared  to  our  power  and  to  our 
comprehension,  it  is  not  a  miracle  compared  to  the  power 
that  performs  it ;  but  as  nothing  in  this  description  con- 
veys the  idea  that  is  affixed  to  the  word  miracle,  it  is 
necessary  to  carry  the  inquiry  further. 

Mankind  have  conceived  to  themselves  certain  laws, 
by  which  what  they  call  nature  is  supposed  to  act ;  and 
that  a  miracle  is  something  contrary  to  the  operation  and 
effect  of  those  laws  ;  but  unless  we  know  the  whole  ex- 
tent of  those  laws,  and  of  what  are  commonly  called  the 
powers  of  nature,  we  are  not  able  to  judge  whether  any- 
thing that  may  appear  to  us  wonderful  or  miraculous  be 
within,  or  be  beyond,  or  be  contrar>'  to,  her  natural 
power  of  acting. 

The  ascension  of  a  man  several  miles  high  in  the  air 
would  have  everything  in  it  that  constitutes  the  idea  of  a 


62  AGE  OF   REASON. 

miracle,  if  it  were  not  known  that  a  species  of  air  can  be 
generated,  several  times  lighter  than  the  common  atmos- 
pheric air,  and  yet  possess  elasticity  enough  to  prevent 
the  balloon  in  which  that  light  air  is  enclosed  from  being 
compressed  into  as  many  times  less  bulk  by  the  common 
air  that  surrounds  it.  In  like  manner,  extracting  flames 
or  sparks  of  fire  from  the  human  body,  as  visible  as  from 
a  steel  struck  with  a  flint,  and  causing  iron  or  steel  to 
move  without  any  visible  agent,  would  also  give  the  idea 
of  a  miracle,  if  we  were  not  acquainted  with  electricity 
and  magnetism.  So  also  would  many  other  experi- 
ments in  natural  philosophy,  to  those  who  are  not  ac- 
quainted with  the  subject.  The  restoring  persons  to  life 
who  are  to  appearance  dead,  as  is  practised  upon  drowned 
persons,  would  also  be  a  miracle,  if  it  were  not  known 
that  animation  is  capable  of  being  suspended  without 
being  extinct. 

Besides  these,  there  are  performances  by  sleight-of- 
hand,  and  by  persons  acting  in  concert,  that  have  a  mira- 
culous appearance,  which  when  known  are  thought 
nothing  of  And  besides  these,  there  are  mechanical  and 
optical  deceptions.  There  is  now  an  exhibition  in  Paris 
of  ghosts  or  spectres,  which,  though  it  is  not  imposed 
upon  the  spectators  as  a  fact,  has  an  astonishing  appear- 
ance. As,  therefore,  we  know  not  the  extent  to  which 
either  nature  or  art  can  go,  there  is  no  positive  criterion 
to  determine  what  a  miracle  is,  and  mankind,  in  giving 
credit  to  appearances,  under  the  idea  of  there  being 
miracles,  are  subject  to  be  continually  imposed  upon. 

Since,  then,  appearances  are  so  capable  of  deceiving, 
and  things  not  real  have  a  strong  resemblance  to  things 
that  are,  nothing  can  be  more  inconsistent  than  to  sup- 
pose that  the  Almighty  would  make  use  of  means  such 
as  are  called  miracles,  that  would  subject  the  person  who 
performed  them  to  the  suspicion  of  being  an  impostor, 
and  the  person  who  related  them  to  be  suspected  of  lying, 


AGE  OP   REASON.  63 

and  the  doctrine  intended  to  be  supported  thereby  to  be 
suspected  as  a  fabulous  invention. 

Of  all  the  modes  of  evidence  that  ever  were  invented 
to  obtain  belief  to  any  system  or  opinion  to  which  the 
name  of  religion  has  been  g^ven,  that  of  miracle,  how- 
ever successful  the  imposition  may  have  been,  is  the 
most  inconsistent  For,  in  the  first  place,  whenever  re- 
course is  had  to  show,  for  the  purpose  of  procuring  that 
belief,  (for  a  miracle,  under  any  idea  of  the  word,  is  a 
show),  it  implies  a  lameness  or  weakness  in  the  doc- 
trine that  is  preached.  And,  in  the  second  place,  it  is 
degrading  the  Almighty  into  the  character  of  a  show- 
man, playing  tricks  to  amuse  and  make  the  people  stare 
and  wonder.  It  is  also  the  most  equivocal  sort  of  evi- 
dence that  can  be  set  up  ;  for  the  belief  is  not  to  depend 
upon  the  thing  called  a  miracle,  but  upon  the  credit  of 
the  reporter  who  says  that  he  saw  it ;  and,  therefore,  the 
thing,  were  it  true,  would  have  no  better  chance  of  being 
believed  than  if  it  were  a  He. 

Suppose  I  were  to  say,  that  when  I  sat  down  to  write 
this  book,  a  hand  presented  itself  in  the  air,  took  up  the 
pen,  and  wrote  every  word  that  is  herein  written  ;  would 
an  V  body  believe  me  ?  Certainly  they  would  not.  Would 
they  believe  me  a  whit  the  more  if  the  thing  had  been  a 
fact?  Certainly  they  would  not.  Since,  then,  a  real 
miracle,  were  it  to  happen,  would  be  subject  to  the  same 
fate  as  the  falsehood,  the  inconsistency  becomes  the 
greater  of  supposing  the  Almighty  would  make  use  of 
means  that  would  not  answer  the  purpose  for  which  they 
were  intended,  even  if  they  were  real. 

If  we  are  to  suppose  a  miracle  to  be  something  so  en- 
tirely out  of  the  course  of  what  is  called  nature,  that  she 
must  go  out  of  that  course  to  accomplish  it,  and  we  see 
an  account  g^ven  of  such  miracle  by  the  person  who  said 
he  saw  it,  it  raises  a  question  in  the  mind  very  easily  de- 
cided, which  is,  is  it  more  probable  that  nature  should  go 


64  AGE   OF   REASON. 

out  of  her  course,  or  that  a  man  should  tell  a  lie?  We 
have  never  seen,  in  our  time,  nature  go  out  of  her  course; 
but  we  have  good  reason  to  believe  that  millions  of  lies 
have  been  told  in  the  same  time  ;  it  is,  therefore,  at  least 
millions  to  one,  that  the  reporter  of  a  miracle  tells  a  lie. 

The  story  of  the  whale  swallowing  Jonah,  though  a 
whale  is  large  enough  to  do  it,  borders  greatly  on  the 
marvelous  ;  but  it  would  have  approached  nearer  to  the 
idea  of  a  miracle,  if  Jonah  had  swallowed  the  whale.  In 
this,  which  may  serve  for  all  cases  of  miracles,  the  mat- 
ter would  decide  itself,  as  before  stated,  namely,  is  it  more 
probable  that  a  man  should  have  swallowed  a  whale  or 
told  a  lie  ? 

But  suppose  that  Jonah  had  really  swallowed  the  whale, 
and  gone  with  it  in  his  belly  to  Nineveh,  and,  to  con- 
vince the  people  that  it  was  true,  had  cast  it  up  in  their 
sight,  of  the  full  length  and  size  of  a  whale,  would  they 
not  have  believed  him  to  have  been  the  devil,  instead  of  a 
prophet  ?  Or,  if  the  whale  had  carried  Jonah  to  Ninevah, 
and  cast  him  up  in  the  same  public  manner,  would  the\' 
not  have  believed  the  whale  to  have  been  the  devil,  and 
Jonah  one  of  his  imps  ? 

The  most  extraordinarj'  of  all  the  things  called  mira- 
cles, related  in  the  New  Testament,  is  that  of  the  devil 
flying  away  with  Jesus  Christ,  and  carrying  him  to  the 
top  of  a  high  mountain,  and  to  the  top  of  the  highest 
pinnacle  of  the  temple,  and  showing  him  and  promising 
to  him  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  World.  How  happened  it 
that  he  did  not  discover  America,  or  is  it  only  with 
kingdoms  that  his  sooty  highness  has  any  interest? 

I  have  too  much  respect  for  the  moral  character  of 
Christ  to  believe  that  he  told  this  whale  of  a  miracle  him- 
self; neither  is  it  easy  to  account  for  what  purpose  it 
could  have  been  fabricated,  unless  it  were  to  impose  upon 
the  connoisseurs  of  miracles,  as  is  sometimes  practised 
upon  the  connoisseurs  of  Queen  Anne's  farthings  and  col- 


AGE  OF   REASON.  65 

lectors  of  relics  and  antiquities  ;  or  to  render  the  belief  of 
miracles  ridiculous,  by  outdoing  miracles,  as  Don  Quixote 
outdid  chivalry  ;  or  to  embarrass  the  belief  of  miracles, 
by  making  it  doubtful  by  what  power,  whether  of  God 
or  of  the  devil,  anything  called  a  miracle  was  petfonned. 
It  requires,  how  ever,  a  great  deal  of  faith  in  the  devil  to 
believe  this  miracle. 

In  every  point  of  view  in  which  those  tnings  called 
miracles  can  be  placed  and  considered,  the  reality  of  them 
is  improbable  and  their  existence  unnecessary.  They 
would  not,  as  before  observ^ed,  answer  any  useful  purpose, 
even  if  they  were  true ;  for  it  is  more  difficult  to  obtain 
belief  to  a  miracle,  than  to  a  principle  evidently  moral 
without  any  miracle.  Moral  principle  speaks  univers- 
ally for  itself.  Miracle  could  be  but  a  thing  of  the 
moment,  and  seen  but  by  a  few  ;  after  this  it  requires  a 
transfer  of  faith  from  God  to  man  to  believe  a  miracle 
upon  man's  report.  Instead,  therefore,  of  admitting  the 
recitals  of  miracles  as  evidence  of  any  system  of  religion 
being  true,  they  ought  to  be  considered  as  symptoms  of 
its  being  fabulous.  It  is  necessary  to  the  full  and  up- 
right character  of  truth  that  it  rejects  the  crutch,  and  it 
is  consistent  with  the  character  of  fable  to  seek  the  aid 
that  truth  rejects.     Thus  much  for  mystery  and  miracle. 

As  mystery  and  miracle  took  charge  of  the  past  and 
the  present,  prophecy  took  charge  of  the  future  and 
rounded  the  tenses  of  faith.  It  was  not  sufficient  to  know 
what  had  been  done,  but  what  would  be  done.  The  sup- 
posed prophet  was  the  supposed  historian  of  times  to 
come  ;  and  if  he  happened,  in  shooting  with  a  long  bow 
of  a  thousand  years,  to  strike  within  a  thousand  miles 
of  a  mark,  the  ingenuity  of  posterity  could  make  it 
point-blank  ;  and  if  he  happened  to  be  directly  wrong, 
it  was  only  to  suppose,  as  in  the  case  of  Jonah  and 
Nineveh,  that  God  had  repented  himself  and  changed 
his  mind.    What  a  fool  do  fabulous  systems  make  of  man  ! 


66  AGE  OF  REASON. 

It  has  been  shown,  in  a  former  part  of  this  work, 
that  the  original  meaning  of  the  words  prophet  and 
Prophesying\id.s\)^^n  changed,  and  that  a  prophet,  in  the 
sense  of  the  word  as  now  used,  is  a  creature  of  modern 
invention ;  and  it  is  owing  to  this  change  in  the  mean- 
ing of  the  words,  that  the  flights  and  metaphors  of  the 
Jewish  poets,  and  phrases  and  expressions  now  rendered 
obscure  by  our  not  being  acquainted  with  the  local  cir- 
cumstances to  which  they  applied  at  the  time  they  were 
used,  have  been  erected  into  prophecies,  and  made  to 
bend  to  explanations  at  the  will  and  whimsical  conceits 
of  sectaries,  expounders,  and  commentators.  Every- 
thing unintelligible  was  prophetical,  and  everything  in- 
significant was  typical.  A  blunder  would  have  served 
for  a  prophecy,  and  a  dish-clout  for  a  type. 

If  by  a  prophet  we  are  to  suppose  a  man  to  whom  the 
Almighty  communicated  some  event  that  would  take 
place  in  future,  either  there  were  such  men  or  there  were 
not.  If  there  were,  it  is  consistent  to  believe  that  the 
event  so  communicated  would  be  told  in  terms  that  could 
be  understood,  and  not  related  in  such  a  loose  and  ob- 
scure manner  as  to  be  out  of  the  comprehension  of  those 
that  heard  it,  and  so  equivocal  as  to  fit  almost  any  cir- 
cumstance that  may  happen  afterward.  It  is  conceiving 
very  irreverently  of  the  Almighty,  to  suppose  that  he 
would  deal  in  this  jesting  manner  with  mankind,  yet  all 
the  things  called  prophecies  in  the  book  called  the  Bible 
come  under  this  description. 

But  it  is  with  proj^hecy  as  it  is  with  miracle  ;  it  could 
not  answer  the  purpose  even  if  it  were  real.  Those  to 
whom  a  prophecy  should  be  told,  could  not  tell  whether 
the  man  prophesied  or  lied,  or  whether  it  had  been  re- 
vealed to  him,  or  whether  he  conceited  it ;  and  if  the 
thing  that  he  prophesied,  or  intended  to  prophesy,  should 
happen,  or  something  like  it,  among  the  multitude  of 
things  that  are  daily  happening,   nobody  could    again 


f 


AGB  OF   REASON.  67 

know  whether  he  foreknew  it,  or  guessed  at  it,  or  whether 
it  was  accidental.  A  prophet,  therefore,  is  a  character 
useless  and  unnecessary  ;  and  the  safe  side  of  the  case  is 
to  guard  against  being  imposed  upon  by  not  giving  credit 
to  such  relations. 

Upon  the  whole,  mystery,  miracle,  and  prophecy  are 
appendages  that  belong  to  fabulous  and  not  to  true  reli- 
gion. They  are  the  means  by  which  so  many  Lo^  /teres  / 
and  Lo^  theres  1  have  been  spread  about  the  world,  and 
religion  been  made  into  a  trade.  The  success  of  one  im- 
postor gave  encouragement  to  another,  and  the  quieting 
salvo  of  doing  some  good  by  keeping  up  2i  pious  fraud 
protected  them  from  remorse. 

Having  now  extended  the  subject  to  a  greater  length 
than  I  first  intended,  I  shall  bring  it  to  a  close  by  ab- 
stracting a  summary  from  the  whole. 

First — That  the  idea  or  belief  of  a  word  of  God  exist- 
ing in  print,  or  in  writing,  or  in  speech,  is  inconsistent 
in  itself  for  reasons  already  assigned.  These  reasons, 
among  many  others,  are  the  want  of  a  universal 
language ;  the  mutability  of  language  ;  the  errors  to 
which  translations  are  subject :  the  possibility  of  totally 
suppressing  such  a  word  ;  the  probability  of  altering 
it,  or  of  fabricating  the  whole,  and  imposing  it  upon 
the  world. 

Secondly — That  the  Creation  we  behold  is  the  real  and 
ever-existing  word  of  God,  in  which  we  cannot  be  de- 
ceived. It  proclaims  his  power,  it  demonstrates  his  wis- 
dom, it  manifests  his  goodness  and  beneficence. 

Thirdly — That  the  moral  duty  of  man  consists  in 
imitating  the  moral  goodness  and  beneficence  of  God, 
manifested  in  the  creation  toward  all  his  creatures. 
That  seeing,  as  we  daily  do,  the  goodness  of  God  to  all 
men,  it  is  an  example  calling  upon  all  men  to  practise 
the  same  toward  each  other;  and,  consequently,    that 


68  AGE   OF   REASON. 

everything  of  persecution  and  revenge  between  man  and 
man,  and  everything  of  cruelty  to  animals,  is  a  violation 
of  moral  duty. 

I  trouble  not  myself  about  the  manner  of  future  exist- 
ence. I  content  myself  with  believing,  even  to  positive 
conviction,  that  the  Power  that  gave  me  existence  is  able 
to  continue  it,  in  any  form  and  manner  he  pleases,  either 
with  or  without  this  body  ;  and  it  appears  more  probable 
to  me  that  I  shall  continue  to  exist  hereafter,  than  that 
I  should  have  had  existence,  as  I  now  have,  before  that 
existence  began. 

It  is  certain  that,  in  one  point,  all  the  nations  of  the  earth 
and  all  religions  agree — all  believe  in  a  God  ;  the  things 
in  which  they  disagree,  are  the  redundancies  annexed  to 
that  belief;  and,  therefore,  if  ever  a  universal  religion 
should  prevail,  it  will  not  be  by  believing  anything  new, 
but  in  getting  rid  of  redundancies,  and  believing  as  man 
believed  at  first.  Adam,  if  ever  there  were  such  a  man, 
was  created  a  Deist ;  but  in  the  meantime,  let  every  man. 
follow,  as  he  has  a  right  to  do,  the  religion  and  the  wor- 
ship he  prefers. 


END  OF  THE   FIRST   PART. 


AGE  OF  REASON, 


BEING  AN  INVESTIGATION  OF 


TRUE   AND    FABULOUS    THEOLOGY. 


THOMAS    PAINE, 


ABT  TO  THK  COMMITTEI  Or  PORBION   AFPAIK!>  IN   THE  AMBRtCAN  RBTOLUTION 
AMD  AUTBOB  OF  "COMMON  BBN8K,"  "  TBB  CB18I8,"  "  BieBTfl  Of  MAM,"  BTO. 


PART   II. 


New  York: 
PETER   ECKLER.  PUBLISHER, 

35  I'ui/roN  Stkkkt. 


PREFACE. 


I  HAVE  mentioned  in  the  former  part  of  the  Age  of 
Reason  that  it  had  long  been  my  intention  to  pub- 
lish my  thoughts  upon  religion ;  but  that  I  had 
originally  reserved  it  to  a  later  period  in  life,  intending 
it  to  be  the  last  work  I  should  undertake.  The  circum- 
stances, however,  which  existed  in  France  in  the  latter 
end  of  the  year  1793,  determined  me  to  delay  it  no  longer. 
The  just  and  humane  principles  of  the  revolution,  which 
philosophy  had  first  diffused,  had  been  departed  from. 
The  idea,  always  dangerous  to  society,  as  it  is  derogatory 
to  the  Almighty,  that  priests  could  forgive  sins,  though 
it  seemed  to  exist  no  longer,  had  blunted  the  feelings  of 
humanity,  and  prepared  men  for  the  commission  of  all 
manner  of  crimes.  The  intolerant  spirit  of  Church  perse- 
cutions had  transferred  itself  into  politics ;  the  tribunal 
styled  revolutionary,  supplied  the  place  of  an  inquisition  ; 
and  the  guillotine  and  the  stake  outdid  the  fire  and 
fagot  of  the  Church.  I  saw  many  of  my  most  intimate 
friends  destroyed,  others  daily  carried  to  prison,  and  I 
had  reason  to  believe,  and  had  also  intimations  given  me, 
that  the  same  danger  was  approaching  myself. 

Under  these  disadvantages,  I  began  the  former  part  of 
the  Age  of  Reason;  I  had,  besides,  neither  Bible  nor 
Testament  to  refer  to,  though  I  was  writing  against  both  ; 
nor  could  I  procure  any  :  notwithstanding  which,  I  have 
produced  a  work  that  no  Bible  believer,  though  writing 
at  his  ease,  and  with  a  library  of  Church  books  about 
him,  can  refute. 


72  PREFACE. 

Toward  the  latter  end  of  December  of  that  year,  a 
motion  was  made  and  carried,  to  exclude  foreigners  from 
the  convention ,  There  were  but  two  in  it,  Anacharsis 
Cloots  and  myself;  and  I  saw  I  was  particularly  pointed  at 
by  Bourdon  de  I'Oise,  in  his  speech  on  that  motion. 

Conceiving,  after  this,  that  I  had  but  a  few  days  of 
liberty,  I  sat  down  and  brought  the  work  to  a  close  as 
speedily  as  possible  ;  and  I  had  not  finished  it  more  than 
six  hours,  in  the  state  it  has  since  appeared,  before  a  guard 
came  there,  about  three  in  the  morning,  with  an  order 
signed  by  the  two  Committees  of  public  Safety  and  Surety- 
General  for  putting  me  in  arrestation  as  a  foreigner, 
and  conveyed  me  to  the  prison  of  the  Luxembourg.  I 
contrived,  on  my  way  there,  to  call  on  Joel  Barlow,  and 
I  put  the  manuscript  of  the  work  into  his  hands,  as  more 
safe  than  in  my  possession  in  prison  ;  and  not  knowing 
what  might  be  the  fate  in  France  either  of  the  writer  or 
the  work,  I  addressed  it  to  the  protection  of  the  citizens 
of  the  United  States. 

It  is  with  justice  that  I  say  that  the  guard  who  exe- 
cuted this  order,  and  the  interpreter  of  the  Committee  of 
General  Surety  who  accompanied  them  to  examine  my 
papers,  treated  me  not  only  with  civility,  but  with  re- 
spect. The  keeper  of  the  Luxembourg,  Bennoit,  a  man 
of  a  good  heart,  showed  to  me  ever}'^  friendship  in  his 
power,  as  did  also  all  his  family,  while  he  continued  in 
that  station.  He  was  removed  from  it,  put  into  ar- 
restation, and  carried  before  the  tribunal  upon  a  malig- 
nant accusation,  but  acquitted. 

After  I  had  been  in  the  Luxembourg  about  three  weeks, 
the  Americans  then  in  Paris  went  in  a  body  to  the  con- 
vention to  reclaim  me  as  their  countryman  and  friend  ; 
but  were  answered  by  the  President,  Vadier,  who  was 
also  President  of  the  Committee  of  Surety-General,  and 
had  signed  the  order  for  ray  arrestation,  that  I  was  boni 
in  England.     I  heard  no  more,  after  this,  from  any  per- 


PREFACE.  73 

son  out  of  the  walls  of  the  prison  till  the  fall  of  Rob- 
espierre, on  the  9th  of  Thermidor — July  27,  1794. 

About  two  months  before  this  event  I  was  seized  with 
a  fever,  that  in  its  progress  had  every  symptom  of  be- 
coming mortal,  and  from  the  effects  of  which  I  am  not 
recovered.  It  was  then  that  I  remembered  with  renewed 
satisfaction,  and  congratulated  myself  most  sincerely,  on 
having  written  the  former  part  of  the  Age  0/ Reason.  I 
had  then  but  little  expectation  of  surviving,  and  those 
about  nie  had  less.  I  know,  therefore,  by  experience, 
the  conscientious  trial  of  my  own  principles. 

I  was  then  with  three  chamber  comrades,  Joseph  Van- 
huele,  of  Bruges  ;  Charles  Bastini,  and  Michael  Rubyns, 
of  Louvain.  The  unceasing  and  anxious  attention  of 
these  three  friends  to  me,  by  night  and  by  day,  I  re- 
member with  gratitude  and  mention  with  pleasure. 
It  happened  that  a  physician  (Dr.  Graham)  and  a 
surgeon  (Mr.  Bond),  part  of  the  suite  of  General 
O'  Hara,  were  then  in  the  Luxembourg.  I  ask  not  myself 
whether  it  be  convenient  to  them,  as  men  under  the 
English  government,  that  I  express  to  them  my  thanks, 
but  I  should  reproach  myself  if  I  did  not  ;  and  also  to  the 
physician  of  the  Luxembourg,  Dr.  Markoski. 

I  have  some  reason  to  believe,  because  I  cannot  dis- 
cover any  other  cause,  that  this  illness  preserved  me  in 
existence.  Among  the  papers  of  Robespierre  that  were 
examined  and  reported  upon  to  the  Convention  by  a 
Committee  of  Deputies,  is  a  note  in  the  hand-writing  of 
Robespierre,  in  the  following  words  : 

"  Demander    que   Thomas    Paine    soit  To  demand  that  a  decree  of  accusation 

decrete  d'accusation,  pour  I'interfit  de  be  passed  against  Thomas  Paine,  for  the 
PAmerique  autant  que  de  la  France."  interest  of  America,  as  well  as  of  France. 

From  what  cause  it  was  that  the  intention  was  not  put 
in  execution  I  know  not,  and  cannot  inform  myself,  and 
therefore  I  ascribe  it  to  impossibility,  on  account  of  that 
illness. 


74  PREFACE. 

The  Convention,  to  repair  as  much  as  lay  in  their 
power  the  injustice  I  had  sustained,  invited  me  publicly 
and  unanimously  to  return  into  the  Convention,  and 
which  I  accepted,  to  show  I  could  bear  an  injury  with- 
out permitting  it  to  injure  my  principles  or  my  disposi- 
tion. It  is  not  because  right  principles  have  been  vio- 
lated that  they  are  to  be  abandoned. 

I  have  seen,  since  I  have  been  at  liberty,  several  pub- 
lications written,  some  in  America  and  some  in  Eng- 
land, as  answers  to  the  former  part  of  the  Age  of  Reason. 
If  the  authors  of  these  can  amuse  themselves  by  so  doing, 
I  shall  not  interrupt  them.  They  may  write  against  the 
work,  and  against  me,  as  much  as  they  please  ;  they  do 
me  more  service  than  they  intend,  and  I  can  have  no  ob- 
jection that  they  write  on.  They  will  find,  however,  by 
this  second  part,  without  its  being  written  as  an  answer 
to  them,  that  they  must  return  to  their  work,  and  spin 
their  cobweb  over  again.  The  first  is  brushed  away  by 
accident. 

They  will  now  find  that  I  have  furnished  myself  with 
a  Bible  and  Testament  ;  and  I  can  say  also  that  I  have 
found  them  to  be  much  worse  books  than  I  had  con- 
ceived. If  I  have  erred  in  anything  in  the  former  part 
of  the  Age  of  Reason.,  it  has  been  by  speaking  better  of 
some  parts  of  those  books  than  they  have  deserved. 

I  observe  that  all  my  opponents  resort,  more  or  less,  to 
what  they  call  Scripture  evidence  and  Bible  authority 
to  help  them  out.  They  are  so  little  masters  of  the  sub- 
ject, as  to  confound  a  dispute  about  authenticity  with  a 
dispute  about  doctrines;  I  will,  however,  put  them 
right,  that  if  they  should  be  disposed  to  write  any  more, 
they  may  know  how  to  begin. 

THOMAS  PAINE. 

October.^  rygS- 


AGE  OF  REASON. 


PART   SECOND. 

IT  has  often  been  said,  that  anything  may  be  proved 
from  the  Bible,  but  before  anything  can  be  admitted 
as  proved  by  the  Bible,  the  Bible  itself  must  be 
proved  to  be  true ;  for  if  the  Bible  be  not  true,  or  the 
truth  of  it  be  doubtful,  it  ceases  to  have  authority,  and 
cannot  be  admitted  as  proof  of  any  thing. 

It  has  been  the  practice  of  all  Christian  commentators 
on  the  Bible,  and  of  all  Christian  priests  and  preachers, 
to  impose  the  Bible  on  the  world  as  a  mass  of  truth  and 
as  the  word  of  God  ;  they  have  disputed  and  wrangled, 
and  anathematized  each  other  about  the  supposed  mean- 
ing of  particular  parts  and  passages  therein  ;  one  has  said 
and  insisted  that  such  a  passage  meant  such  a  thing  ; 
another  that  it  meant  directly  the  contrary  ;  and  a  third, 
that  it  meant  neither  one  nor  the  the  other,  but  some- 
thing different  from  both  ;  and  this  they  call  under- 
standing the  Bible. 

It  has  happened  that  all  the  answers  which  I  have  seen 
to  the  former  part  of  the  Age  of  Reason  have  been  written 
by  priests ;  and  these  pious  men,  like  their  predecessors, 
contend  and  wrangle,  and  pretend  to  understand  the 
Bible ;  each  understands  it  differently,  but  each  under- 
stands it  best ;  and  they  have  agreed  in  nothing  but  in 
telling  their  readers  that  Thomas  Paine  understands  it 
not 


76  AGE   OF   REASON. 

Now,  instead  of  wasting  their  time,  and  heating  them- 
selves in  fractious  disputations  about  doctrinal  points 
drawn  from  the  Bible,  these  men  ought  to  know,  and  if 
they  do  not,  it  is  civility  to  inform  them,  that  the  first 
thing  to  be  understood  is,  whether  there  is  sufficient 
authority  for  believing  the  Bible  to  be  the  word  of  God, 
or  whether  there  is  not. 

There  are  matters  in  that  book,  said  to  be  done  by  the 
express  command  of  God,  that  are  as  shocking  to  humanity 
and  to  every  idea  we  have  of  moral  justice  as  anything 
done  by  Robespierre,  by  Carrier,  by  Joseph  le  Bon,  in 
France,  by  the  English  government  in  the  East  Indies, 
or  by  any  other  assassin  in  modem  times.  When  we 
read  in  the  books  ascribed  to  Moses,  Joshua,  etc.,  that 
they  (the  Israelites)  came  by  stealth  upon  whole  nations 
of  people,  who,  as  history  itself  shows,  had  given  them 
no  offence  ;  that  they  put  all  those  nations  to  the  sword ; 
that  they  spared  neither  age  nor  infancy ;  that  they 
utterly  destroyed  men^  women^  and  children ;  that  they 
left  not  a  soul  to  breathe  —  expressions  that  are  repeated 
over  and  over  again  in  those  books,  and  that,  too,  with 
exulting  ferocity — are  we  sure  these  things  are  facts?  are 
we  sure  that  the  Creator  of  man  commissioned  these  things 
to  be  done  ?  and  are  we  sure  that  the  books  that  tell  us 
so  were  written  by  his  authority  ? 

It  is  not  the  antiquity  of  a  tale  that  is  any  evidence  of 
its  truth  ;  on  the  contrary,  it  is  a  symptom  of  its  being 
fabulous  ;  for  the  more  ancient  any  history-  pretends  to 
be,  the  more  it  has  the  resemblance  of  a  fable.  The 
origin  of  every  nation  is  buried  in  fabulous  tradition,  and 
that  of  the  Jews  is  as  much  to  be  suspected  as  any  other. 
To  charge  the  commission  of  acts  upon  the  Almighty, 
which,  in  their  own  nature,  and  by  every  rule  of  moral 
justice,  are  crimes,  as  all  assassination  is,  and  more  es- 
pecially the  assassination  of  infants,  is  matter  of  serious 
concern.     The  Bible   tells  us,  that  those  assassinations 


AGE  OF   REASON.  77 

were  done  by  the  express  command  of  God.  To  believe, 
therefore,  the  Bible  to  be  tnie,  we  must  unbelieve  all  our 
belief  in  the  moral  justice  of  God  ;  for  wherein  could 
crying  or  smiling  infants  offend  ?  And  to  read  the  Bible 
without  horror,  we  must  undo  everything  that  is  tender, 
sympathizing,  and  benevolent  in  the  heart  of  man. 
Speaking  for  myself,  if  I  had  no  other  evidence  that  the 
Bible  is  fabulous  than  the  sacrifice  I  must  make  to 
believe  it  to  be  true,  that  alone  would  be  sufficient  to  de- 
termine my  choice. 

But  in  addition  to  all  the  moral  evidence  against  the 
Bible,  I  will  in  the  progress  of  this  work  produce  such 
other  evidence  as  even  a  priest  cannot  deny,  and  show, 
from  that  evidence,  that  the  Bible  is  not  entitled  to 
credit  as  being  the  word  of  God. 

But,  before  I  proceed  to  this  examination,  I  will  show 
wherein  the  Bible  differs  from  all  other  ancient  writings 
with  respect  to  the  nature  of  the  evidence  necessary  to 
establish  its  authenticity  ;  and  this  is  the  more  proper  to  be 
done,  because  the  advocates  of  the  Bible,  in  their  answers 
to  the  fonner  part  of  the  Age  of  Reason^  undertake  to 
say,  and  they  put  some  stress  thereon,  that  the  authenticity 
of  the  Bible  is  as  well  established  as  that  of  any  other 
ancient  book  ;  as  if  our  belief  of  the  one  could  become 
any  rule  for  our  belief  of  the  other. 

I  know,  however,  but  of  one  ancient  book  that  authori- 
tatively challenges  universal  consent  and  belief,  and  that 
is  Euclid's  Elements  of  Geometry  ;*  and  the  reason  is, 
because  it  is  a  book  of  self-evident  demonstration,  en- 
tirely independent  of  its  author,  and  of  every  thing  relating 
to  time,  place,  and  circumstance.  The  matters  contained 
in  that  book  would  have  the  same  authority  they  now 
have,  had  they  been  written  by  any  other  person,  or  had 
the  work  been  anonymous,  or  had  the  author  never  been 

*  Euclid,  according  to  chronological  history,  lived  three  hundred  years  before 
Christ,  and  about  one  hundred  before  Archimedes;  he  was  of  the  city  of  Alexandria, 
in  EgypC 


78  AGE    OF   REASON. 

known  ;  for  the  identical  certainty  of  who  was  the 
author,  makes  no  part  of  our  belief  of  the  matter* 
contained  in  the  book.  But  it  is  quite  otherwise  with  re- 
spect to  the  books  ascribed  to  Moses,  to  Joshua,  to  Samuel, 
etc. ;  those  are  books  of.  testimony^  and  they  testify  of 
tilings  naturally  incredible  ;  and,  therefore,  the  whole  of 
our  belief  as  to  the  authenticity  of  those  books  rests,  in 
the  first  place,  upon  the  certainty  that  they  were  written 
by  Moses,  Joshua,  and  Samuel  ;  secondly,  upon  the  credit 
we  give  to  their  testimony.  We  may  believe  the  first, 
that  is,  we  may  believe  the  certainty  of  the  authorship, 
and  yet  not  the  testimony  ;  in  the  same  manner  that  we 
may  believe  that  a  certain  person  gave  evidence  upon  a 
case  and  yet  not  believe  the  evidence  that  he  gave.  But 
if  it  should  be  found  that  the  books  ascribed  to  Moses, 
Joshua,  and  Samuel,  were  not  written  by  Moses,  Joshua, 
and  Samuel,  every  part  of  the  authority  and  authen- 
ticity of  those  books  is  gone  at  once  ;  for  there  can  be  no 
such  thing  as  forged  or  invented  testimony  ;  neither  can 
there  be  anonymous  testimony,  more  especially  as  to 
things  naturally  incredible,  such  as  that  of  talking  with 
God  face  to  face,  or  that  of  the  sun  and  moon  standing  still 
at  the  command  of  a  man.  The  greatest  part  of  the  other 
ancient  books  are  works  of  genius  ;  of  which  kind  are 
those  ascribed  to  Homer,  to  Plato,  to  Aristotle,  to 
Demosthenes,  to  Cicero,  etc.  Here,  again,  the  author  is 
not  essential  in  the  credit  we  give  to  any  of  those  works, 
for,  as  works  of  genius,  they  would  have  the  same  merit 
they  have  now,  were  they  anonymous.  Nobody  believes 
the  Trojan  story,  as  related  by  Homer,  to  be  true —  for 
it  is  the  poet  only  that  is  admired,  and  the  merit  of  the 
poet  will  remain,  though  the  story  be  fabulous.  But  if 
we  disbelieve  the  matters  related  by  the  Bible  authors, 
(Moses  for  instance),  as  we  disbelieve  the  things  related 
by  Homer,  there  remains  nothing  of  Moses  in  our  esti- 
mation, but  an  impostor.     As  to  the  ancient  historians^ 


AGK  OF  REASON.  79 

from  Herodotus  to  Tacitus,  we  credit  them  as  far  as  they 
relate  things  probable  and  credible,  and  no  farther ;  for 
if  we  do,  we  must  believe  the  two  miracles  which  Tacitus 
relates  were  performed  by  Vespasian,  that  of  curing  a 
lame  man  and  a  blind  man,  in  just  the  same  manner  as 
tlic  same  things  are  told  of  Jesus  Christ  by  his  historians. 
We  must  also  believe  the  miracle  cited  by  Josephus, 
that  of  the  sea  of  Pamphilia  opening  to  let  Alexander  and 
his  army  pass,  as  is  related  of  the  Red  Sea  in  Exodus. 
These  miracles  are  quite  as  well  authenticated  as  the 
Bible  miracles,  and  yet  we  do  not  believe  them  ;  conse- 
quently the  degree  of  evidence  necessary  to  establish  our 
belief  of  things  naturally  incredible,  whether  in  the  Bible 
or  elsewhere,  is  far  greater  than  that  which  obtains  our 
belief  to  natural  and  probable  things  ;  and  therefore  the 
advocates  for  the  Bible  have  no  claim  to  our  belief  of  the 
Bible,  because  that  we  believe  things  stated  in  other 
ancient  writings  ;  since  we  believe  the  things  stated  in 
these  writings  no  further  than  they  are  probable  and 
credible,  or  because  they  are  self-evident,  like  Euclid  ;  or 
admire  them  because  they  are  elegant,  like  Homer ;  or 
approve  of  them  because  they  are  sedate,  like  Plato  ; 
or  judicious,  like  Aristotle. 

Having  premised  these  things,  I  proceed  to  examine 
the  authenticity  of  the  Bible,  and  I  begin  with  what  are 
called  the  five  books  of  Moses,  Genesis^  Exodus^  Levi- 
ttcuSy  Numbers^  and  Deuteronomy.  My  intention  is  to 
show  that  those  books  are  spurious,  and  that  Moses  is  not 
the  author  of  them  ;  and  still  further,  that  they  were  not 
written  in  the  time  of  Moses,  nor  till  several  hundred 
years  afterward  ;  that  they  are  no  other  than  an  at- 
tempted history  of  the  life  of  Moses,  and  of  the  times  in 
which  he  is  said  to  have  lived,  and  also  of  the  times 
prior  thereto,  written  by  some  very  ignorant  and  stupid 
pretenders  to  authorship,  several  hundred  years  after  the 
death  of  Moses,  as  men  now  write  histories  of  things  that 


So  AGE  OF  REASON. 

happened,  or  are  supposed  to  have  happened,  several 
hundred  cr  several  thousand  years  ago. 

The  evidence  that  I  shall  produce  in  this  case  is  from 
the  books  themselves,  and  I  shall  confine  myself  to  this 
evidence  only.  Were  I  to  refer  for  proof  to  any  of  the 
ancient  authors  whom  the  advocates  of  the  Bible  call 
profane  authors,  they  would  controvert  that  authority,  as 
I  controvert  theirs  ;  I  will  therefore  meet  them  on  their 
own  ground,  and  oppose  them  with  their  own  weapon, 
the  Bible. 

In  the  first  place,  there  is  no  affirmative  evidence  that 
Moses  is  the  author  of  those  books  ;  and  that  he  is  the 
author,  is  altogether  an  unfounded  opinion,  got  abroad 
nobody  knows  how.  The  style  and  manner  in  which 
those  books  are  written  give  no  room  to  believe,  or  even 
to  suppose,  they  were  written  by  Moses,  for  it  is  alto- 
gether the  style  and  manner  of  another  person  speaking 
of  Moses.  In  Exodus^  Leviticus  and  Numbers  (for  every- 
thing in  Genesis  is  prior  to  the  times  of  Moses,  and  not 
the  least  allusion  is  made  to  him  therein),  the  whole,  I 
say,  of  these  books  is  in  the  third  person  ;  it  is  always, 
the  Lord  said  unto  Moses^  or  Moses  said  unto  the  Lordy 
or  Moses  said  unto  the  people^  or  the  people  said  unto 
Moses ;  and  this  is  the  style  and  manner  that  historians 
use  in  speaking  of  the  persons  whose  lives  and  actions 
they  are  writing.  It  may  be  said  that  a  man  may  speak 
of  himself  in  the  third  person,  and  therefore  it  may  be 
supposed  that  Moses  did ;  but  supposition  proves  nothing ; 
and  ii  the  advocates  for  the  belief  that  Moses  wrote  those 
books  himself  have  nothing  better  to  advance  than  sup- 
position, they  may  as  well  be  silent. 

But  granting  the  grammatical  right  that  Moses  might 
speak  of  himself  in  the  third  person,  because  any  man 
might  speak  of  himself  in  that  manner,  it  cannot  be  ad- 
mitted as  a  fact  in  those  books  that  it  is  Moses  who  speaks, 
without  rendering   Moses   truly  ridiculous  and  absurd. 


AGE   OF   REASON.  8l 

For  example,  Numbers^  chap.  xii.  ver.  3.  Now  the  man 
Moses  was  very  meek^  above  all  the  men  which  were  upon 
the  face  of  the  earth.  If  Moses  said  this  of  himself,  instead 
of  being  the  meekest  of  men,  he  was  one  of  the  most  vain 
and  arrogant  of  coxcombs  ;  and  the  advocates  for  those 
books  may  now  take  which  side  they  please,  for  both 
sides  are  against  them  ;  if  Moses  was  not  the  author,  the 
books  are  without  authority  ;  and  if  he  was  the  author, 
the  author  is  without  credit,  because  to  boast  of  meek- 
ness is  the  reverse  of  meekness,  and  is  a  lie  in  sentiment 

In  Deuteronomy,  the  style  and  manner  of  writing 
marks  more  evidently  than  in  the  former  books  that 
Moses  is  not  the  writer.  The  manner  here  used  is 
dramatical  ;  the  writer  opens  the  subject  by  a  short  in- 
troductory discourse,  and  then  introduces  Moses  in  the 
act  of  speaking,  and  when  he  has  made  Moses  finish  his 
harangue,  he  (the  writer)  resumes  his  own  part,  and  speaks 
till  he  brings  Moses  forward  again,  and  at  last  closes  the 
scene  with  an  account  of  the  death,  funeral,  and  character 
of  Moses. 

This  interchange  of  speakers  occurs  four  times  in  this 
book  ;  from  the  first  verse  of  the  first  chapter  to  the  end 
of  the  fifth  verse,  it  is  the  writer  who  speaks  ;  he  then 
introduces  Moses  as  in  the  act  of  making  his  harangue,  and 
this  continues  to  the  end  of  the  40th  verse  of  the  fourth 
chapter  ;  here  the  writer  drops  Moses,  and  speaks  his- 
torically of  what  was  done  in  consequence  of  what  Moses, 
when  living,  is  supposed  to  have  said,  and  which  the 
writer  has  dramatically  rehearsed. 

The  writer  opens  the  subject  again  in  the  first  verse  of 
the  fifth  chapter,  though  it  is  only  by  saying,  that  Moses 
called  the  people  of  Israel  together ;  he  then  introduces 
Moses  as  before,  and  continues  him,  as  in  the  act  of 
of  speaking,  to  the  end  of  the  26th  chapter.  He  does  the 
same  thing  at  the  beginning  of  the  27th  chapter  ;  and 
continues  Moses,  as  in  the  act  of  speaking,  to  the  end  of 


82  AGE  OF   REASON. 

the  28th  chapter.  At  the  29th  chapter  the  writer  speaks 
again  through  the  whole  of  the  first  verse  and  the  first 
line  of  the  second  verse,  where  he  introduces  Moses  for 
the  last  time,  and  continues  him,  as  in  the  act  of  speak- 
ing, to  the  end  of  the  33d  chapter. 

The  writer  having  now  finished  the  rehearsal  on  the 
part  of  Moses,  comes  forward,  and  speaks  through  the 
whole  of  the  last  chapter ;  he  begins  by  telling  the 
reader  that  Moses  went  to  the  top  of  Pisgah  ;  that  he  saw 
from  thence  the  land  which  (the  writer  says)  had  been 
promised  to  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  ;  that  he,  Moses, 
died  there,  in  the  land  of  Moab,  but  that  nc  man  knoweth 
of  his  sepulchre  unto  this  day ;  that  is,  unto  the  time  in 
which  the  writer  lived  who  wrote  the  book  of  Deuter- 
onomy. The  writer  then  tells  us,  that  Moses  was  1 10 
years  of  age  when  he  died  —  that  his  eye  was  not  dim, 
nor  his  natural  force  abated  ;  and  he  concludes  by  saying 
that  there  arose  not  a  prophet  since  in  Israel  like  unto 
Moses,  whom,  says  this  anonymous  writer,  the  Lord 
knew  face  to  face. 

Having  thus  shown,  as  far  as  grammatical  evidence 
applies,  that  Moses  was  not  the  writer  of  those  books,  I 
will,  after  making  a  few  observations  on  the  inconsisten- 
cies of  the  writer  of  the  book  of  Deuteronomy,  proceed 
to  show  from  the  historical  and  chronological  evidence 
contained  in  those  books,  that  Moses  was  not,  because  he 
could  not  be^  the  writer  of  them,  and  consequently  that 
there  is  no  authority  for  believing  that  the  inhuman  and 
horrid  butcheries  of  men,  women,  and  children,  told  of 
in  those  books,  were  done,  as  those  books  say  they  were, 
at  the  command  of  God.  It  is  a  duty  incumbent  on 
every  true  Deist,  that  he  vindicate  the  moral  justice  of 
Cod  against  the  calumnies  of  the  Bible. 

The  writer  of  the  book  of  Deuteronomy,  whoeverhe  was, 
Cforit  isananonyrnouswork),  isobscure,  andalsoin  contra- 
diction with  himself,  in  the  account  he  has  given  of  Moses* 


AGK  OF  REASON.  83 

After  telling  that  Moses  went  to  the  top  of  Pisgah  (and 
it  does  not  appear  from  any  account  that  he  ever  came 
down  again\  he  tells  us  that  Moses  died  there  in  the  land 
of  Moab,  and  that  he  buried  him  in  a  valley  in  the  land 
of  Moab  ;  but  as  there  is  no  antecedent  to  the  pronoun 
he^  there  is  no  knowing  who  he  was  that  did  bury  him. 
If  the  writer  meant  that  he  (God)  buried  him,  how  should 
he  (the  writer)  know  it?  or  why  should  we  (the  readers) 
believe  him?  since  we  know  not  who  the  writer  was  that 
tells  us  so,  for  certainly  Moses  could  not  himself  tell 
where  he  was  buried. 

The  writer  also  tells  us,  that  no  man  knoweth  where 
the  sepulchre  of  Moses  is  unto  this  day^  meaning  the 
time  in  which  this  writer  lived  ;  how  then  should  he 
know  that  Moses  was  buried  in  a  valley  in  the  land  of 
Moab?  for  as  the  writer  lived  long  after  the  time  of 
Moses,  as  is  evident  from  his  using  the  expression  of  unto 
this  day^  meaning  a  great  length  of  time  after  the  death 
of  Moses,  he  certainly  was  not  at  his  funeral  ;  and  on  the 
other  hand,  it  is  impossible  that  Moses  himself  could  say 
that  no  man  knoweth  where  the  sepulchre  is  unto  this  day. 
To  make  Moses  the  speaker,  would  be  an  improvement 
on  the  play  of  a  child  that  hides  himself  and  cries  nobody 
can  find  me;  nobody  can  find  Moses ! 

This  writer  has  nowhere  told  us  how  he  came  by  the 
speeches  which  he  has  put  into  the  mouth  of  Moses  to 
speak,  and  therefore  we  have  a  right  to  conclude,  that  he 
either  composed  them  himself,  or  wrote  them  from  oral 
tradition.  One  or  the  other  of  these  is  the  more  proba- 
ble, since  he  has  given  in  the  fifth  chapter  a  table  of 
commandments,  in  which  that  called  the  fourth  com- 
mandment is  different  from  the  fourth  commandment  in 
the  twentieth  chapter  of  Exodus.  In  that  of  Exodus, 
the  reason  g^ven  for  keeping  the  seventh  day  is,  *'  because 
(says  the  commandment)  God  made  the  heavens  and  the 
earth  in  six  days,  and  rested  on  the  seventh  ; "  but  in  that 


84  AGE   OF   REASON. 

of  Deuteronomy,  the  reason  given  is  that  it  was  the  day 
on  which  the  children  of  Israel  came  out  of  Eg^pt,  and 
therefore^  says  this  commandment,  the  Loj-d  thy  God 
commanded  thee  to  keep  the  sabbath  day.  This  makes  no 
mention  of  the  creation,  nor  that  of  the  coming  out  of 
Egypt.  There  are  also  many  things  given  as  laws  of 
Moses  in  this  book  that  are  not  to  be  found  in  any  of 
the  other  books  ;  among  which  is  that  inhuman  and 
brutal  law,  chapter  xxi.,  verses  i8,  19,  20,  and  21,  which 
authorizes  parents,  the  father  and  the  mother,  to  bring 
their  own  children  to  have  them  stoned  to  death,  for  what 
it  is  pleased  to  call  stubborness.  But  priests  have 
always  been  fond  of  preaching  up  Deuteronomy,  for 
Deuteronomy  preaches  up  tithes ;  and  it  is  from  this 
book,  chap,  xxv.,  ver.  4,  that  they  have  taken  the  phrase, 
and  applied  it  to  tithing,  that  thou  shalt  not  muzzle  the 
ox  when  he  treadeth  out  the  corn ;  and  that  this  might 
not  escape  observation,  they  have  noted  it  in  the  table  of 
contents  at  the  head  of  the  chapter,  though  it  is  only  a 
single  verse  of  less  than  two  lines.  Oh,  priests  !  priests ! 
ye  are  willing  to  be  compared  to  an  ox,  for  the  sake  of 
tithes.  Though  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  know  identically 
who  the  writer  of  Deuteronomy  was,  it  is  not  difficult  to 
discover  him  professionally.^  that  he  was  some  Jewish 
priest,  who  lived,  as  I  shall  show  in  the  course  of  this 
work,  at  least  three  hundred  and  fifty  years  after  the 
time  of  Moses. 

I  come  now  to  speak  of  the  historical  and  chronologi- 
cal evidence.  The  chronology  that  I  shall  use  is  the 
Bible  chronology',  for  I  mean  not  to  go  out  of  the  Bible 
for  evidence  of  anything,  but  to  make  the  Bible  itself 
prove,  historically  and  chronologically,  that  Moses  is  not 
the  author  of  the  books  ascribed  to  him.  It  is,  therefore, 
proper  that  I  inform  the  reader  (such  a  one  at  least  as 
may  not  have  the  opportunity  of  knowing  it),  that  in  the 
larger  Bibles,  and  also  in  some  smaller  ones,  there  is  a 


AGE  OF  REASON.  85 

series  of  chronology  printed  in  the  margin  of  every  page, 
for  the  purpose  of  showing  how  long  the  historical  mat- 
ters stated  in  eacli  page  happened,  or  are  supposed  to  have 
happened,  before  Christ,  and,  consequently,  the  distance 
of  time  between  one  historical  circumstance  and  another. 

I  begin  with  the  book  of  Genesis.  In  the  14th  chapter 
of  Genesis,  the  writer  gives  an  account  of  Lot  being 
taken  prisoner  in  a  battle  between  the  four  kings  against 
five,  and  carried  off;  and  that  when  the  account  of  Lot 
being  taken,  came  to  Abraham,  he  armed  all  his  house- 
hold and  marched  to  rescue  Lot  from  the  captors,  and 
that  he  pursued  them  unto  Dan  (ver.  14). 

To  show  in  what  manner  this  expression  oi pursuing 
them  unto  Dan  applies  to  the  case  in  question,  I  will 
refer  to  two  circumstances,  the  one  in  America,  the  other 
in  France.  The  city  now  called  New  York,  in  America, 
was  originally  New  Amsterdam  ;  and  the  town  in  France, 
lately  called  Havre  Marat,  was  before  called  Havre  de 
Grace.  New  Amsterdam  was  changed  to  New  York  in 
the  year  1664  ;  Havre  de  Grace  to  Havre  Marat  in  1793. 
Should,  therefore,  any  writing  be  found,  though  without 
date,  in  which  the  name  of  New  York  should  be  men- 
tioned, it  would  be  certain  evidence  that  such  a  writing 
could  not  have  been  written  before,  but  must  have  been 
written  after  New  Amsterdam  was  changed  to  New 
York,  and  consequently,  not  till  after  the  year  1664,  or  at 
least  during  the  course  of  that  year.  And,  in  like  man- 
ner, any  dateless  writing  with  the  name  of  Havre  Marat 
would  be  certain  evidence  that  such  a  writing  must  have 
been  written  after  Havre  de  Grace  became  Havre  Marat, 
and  consequently  not  till  after  the  year  1793,  or  at  least 
during  the  course  of  that  year. 

I  now  come  to  the  application  of  those  cases,  and  to 
show  that  there  was  no  such  place  as  Dan^  till  many 
years  after  the  death  of  Moses,  and  consequently,  that 
Moses  could  not  be  the  writer  of  the  book  of  Genesis^ 


86  AGE  OF  REASON. 

where  this  pccou  at  of  pursuing  them  unto  Dan  is  given. 
The  place  that  is  called  Dan  in  the  Bible  was  originally 
a  town  of  the  Gentiles  called  Laish  ;  and  when  the  tribe 
of  Dan  seized  upon  this  town,  they  changed  its  name  to 
Dan,  in  commemoration  of  Dan,  who  was  the  father  of 
that  tribe,  and  the  great  grandson  of  Abraham. 

To  establish  this  in  pi  oof,  it  is  necessary  to  refer  from 
Genesis^  to  the  i8th  chapter  of  the  book  called  the  Book 
of  Judges.  It  is  there  said  (ver.  27)  that  they  (the  Danites) 
came  unto  Laish  to  a  people  that  were  quiet  and  seaire^ 
and  they  smote  them  with  the  edge  of  the  sword  {the  Bible 
is  filled  with  murder),  and  burned  the  city  with  fire  ;  and 
ihey  built  a  city  (ver.  28),  and  dwelt  therein,  and  they 
called  the  name  of  the  city  Dan^  after  the  name  of  Dan^ 
their  father^  hou  beit  the  name  of  the  city  was  Laish  at 
the  first. 

This  account  of  the  Danites  taking  possession  of  Laish 
and  changing  it  to  Dan,  is  placed  in  the  Book  of  Judges 
immediately  after  the  death  of  Sampson.  The  death  of 
Sampson  is  said  to  have  happened  1120  years  before 
Christ,  and  that  of  Moses  145 1  before  Christ ;  and,  there- 
fore, according  to  the  historical  arrangement,  the  place 
was  not  called  Dan  till  331  years  after  the  death  of 
Moses. 

There  is  a  striking  confusion  between  the  historical 
and  the  chronological  arrangement  in  the  book  oi  Judges. 
The  £ve  last  chapters,  as  they  stand  in  the  book,  17,  18, 
19,  20,  21,  are  put  chronologically  before  all  the  preceding 
chapters  ;  they  are  made  to  be  28  years  before  the  i6th 
chapter,  266  before  the  15th,  245  before  the  13th,  195 
before  the  9th,  90  before  the  4th,  and  15  years  before  the 
ist  chapter.  This  shows  the  uncertain  and  fabulous  state 
of  the  Bible.  According  to  the  chronological  arrange- 
ment, the  taking  of  Laish  and  giving  it  the  name  of  Dan 
is  made  to  be  20  years  after  the  death  of  Joshua,  who  was 
the  successor  of  Moses  ;  and  by  the  historical  or^^er  as  it 


AGE  OF   REASON.  87 

stands  in  the  book,  it  is  made  to  be  306  years  after  the 
death  of  Joshua,  and  331  after  that  of  Moses ;  but  they 
both  exclude  Moses  from  being  the  writer  of  Genesis,  be- 
cause, according  to  either  of  the  statements,  no  such 
place  as  Dan  existed  in  the  time  of  Moses  ;  and  there- 
fore the  writer  of  Genesis  must  have  been  some  person 
who  lived  after  the  town  of  Laish  had  the  name  of  Dan  ; 
and  who  that  person  was  nobody  knows,  and  conse- 
quently the  book  of  Genesis  is  anonymous  and  without 
authority. 

I  proceed  now  to  state  another  point  of  historical  and 
chronological  evidence,  and  to  show  therefrom,  as  in  the 
preceding  case,  tha^  Moses  is  not  the  author  of  the  book 
of  Genesis. 

In  the  36th  chapter  of  Genesis  there  is  given  a  genealogy 
of  the  sons  and  descendants  of  Esau,  who  are  called  Edoin- 
ites,  and  also  1  list,  by  name,  of  the  kings  of  Edom,  in 
enumerating  of  which,  it  is  said,  (verse  31),  And  these  are 
the  kings  that  reigned  in  Edom.  before  there  reigned 
any  king  over  th£  children  of  Israel. 

Now,  were  any  dateless  writings  to  be  found  in  which, 
speaking  of  any  past  events,  the  writer  should  say.  These 
things  happened  before  there  was  any  Congress  in 
America,  or  before  there  was  any  Convention  in  France, 
it  would  be  evidence  that  such  writing  could  not  have 
been  written  before,  and  could  only  be  written  after  there 
was  a  Congress  in  America,  or  a  Convention  in  France, 
as  the  case  might  be ;  and,  consequently,  that  it  could 
not  be  written  by  any  pCiT^on  who  died  before  there  was 
a  Congress  in  the  one  country  or  a  Convention  in  the 
other. 

Nothing  is  more* frequent,  as  well  in  history  as  in  con- 
versation, than  to  refer  to  a  fact  in  the  room  of  a  date  ; 
it  is  most  natural  so  to  do,  first,  because  a  fact  fixes  itself  in 
the  memory  better  than  a  date  ;  secondly,  because  the 
fact  includes  the  date,  and  serves  to  excite  two  ideas  at 


88  AGE  OF   REASON. 

once  ;  and  this  manner  of  speaking  by  circumstances  im- 
plies as  positively  that  the  fact  alluded  to  is  past  as  if  it 
were  so  expressed.  When  a  person  speaking  upon  any 
matter,  says,  it  was  before  I  was  married,  or  before  my 
son  was  born,  or  before  I  went  to  America,  or  before  I 
went  to  France,  it  is  absolutely  understood,  and  intended 
to  be  understood,  that  he  had  been  married,  that  he  has 
had  a  son,  that  he  has  been  in  America,  or  been  in 
France.  Language  does  not  admit  of  using  this  mode  of 
expression  in  any  other  sense  ;  and  whenever  such  an 
expression  is  found  anywhere,  it  can  only  be  understood 
in  the  sense  in  which  it  only  could  have  been  used. 

The  passage,  therefore,  that  I  have  quoted — "that 
these  are  the  kings  that  reigned  in  Edom,  before  there 
reigned  any  king  over  the  children  of  Israel ' '  —  could 
only  have  been  written  after  the  first  king  began  to  reign 
over  them  ;  and,  consequently,  that  the  book  of  Genesis, 
so  far  from  having  been  written  by  Moses,  could  not  have 
been  written  till  the  time  of  Saul  at  least.  This  is  the 
positive  sense  of  the  passage  ;  but  the  expression,  any 
king,  inplies  more  kings  than  one,  at  least  it  implies 
two,  and  this  will  carry  it  to  the  time  of  David  ;  and  if 
taken  in  a  general  sense,  it  carries  it  through  all  the  time 
of  the  Jewish  monarchy. 

Had  we  met  with  this  verse  in  any  part  of  the  Bible 
that  professed  to  have  been  written  after  kings  began 
to  reign  in  Israel,  it  would  have  been  impossible  not  to 
have  seen  the  application  of  it.  It  happens  then  that 
this  is  the  case  ;  the  two  books  of  Chronicles,  which 
gave  a  history  of  all  the  kings  of  Israel,  dso^ professedly, 
as  well  as  in  fact,  written  after  the  Jewish  monarchy 
began  ;  and  this  verse  that  I  have  quoted,  and  all  the  re- 
maining verses  of  the  36th  chapter  of  Genesis,  are  word  for 
word  in  the  first  chapter  of  Chronicles,  beginning  at  the 
43d  verse. 

It  was  with  consistency  that  the  writer  of  the  Chroni- 


AGE  OF    REASON.  89 

cles  could  say,  as  he  has  said,  ist  Chron. ,  chap.  i. ,  ver. 
43,  These  are  the  kings  that  reigned  in  the  land  ofEdom^ 
before  any  king  reigned  over  the  children  of  Israel^  be- 
cause he  was  going  to  give,  and  has  given,  a  list  of  the 
kings  that  had  reigned  in  Israel  ;  but  as  it  is  impossible 
that  the  same  expression  could  have  been  used  before 
that  period,  it  is  as  certain  as  anything  that  can  be  proved 
from  historical  language  that  this  part  of  Genesis  is  taken 
from  Chronicles,  and  that  Genesis  is  not  so  old  as  Chroni- 
cles, and  probably  not  so  old  as  the  book  of  Homer,  or  as 
i^Ssop's  Fables^  admitting  Homer  to  have  been,  as  the 
tables  of  Chronology  state,  contemporary  with  David  or 
Solomon,  and  ^sop  to  have  lived  about  the  end  of  the 
Jewish  monarchy. 

Take  away  from  Genesis  the  belief  that  Moses  was  the 
author,  on  which  only  the  strange  belief  that  it  is  the 
word  of  God  has  stood,  and  there  remains  nothing  of 
Genesis  but  an  anonymous  book  of  stories,  fables,  and 
traditionary  or  invented  absurdities,  or  of  downright  lies. 
The  story  of  Eve  and  the  serpent,  and  of  Noah  and  his 
ark,  drops  to  a  level  with  the  Arabian  tales,  without  the 
merit  of  being  entertaining  ;  and  the  account  of  men 
living  to  eight  and  nine  hundred  years  becomes  as  fabu- 
lous as  the  immortality  of  the  giants  of  the  Mythology. 

Besides,  the  character  of  Moses,  as  stated  in  the  Bible, 
is  the  most  horrid  that  can  be  imagined.  If  those  ac- 
counts be  true,  he  was  the  wretch  that  first  began  and 
carried  on  wars  on  the  score  or  on  the  pretence  of  religion  ; 
and  under  that  mask,  or  that  infatuation,  committed  the 
most  unexampled  atrocities  that  are  to  be  found  in  the 
history  of  any  nation,  of  which  I  will  state  only  one 
instance. 

When  the  Jewish  army  returned  from  one  of  their 
plundering  and  murdering  excursions,  the  account  goes 
on  as  follows  :    Numbers,  chap,  xxxi.,  ver.  13: 

"And   Moses,    and   Eleazar  the  priest,    and   all    the 


^  AGE   OF   REASON. 

princes  of  the  congregation,  went  forth  to  meet  thetn 
without  the  camp;  and  Moses  was  wroth  with  the  officers 
of  the  host,  with  the  captains  over  thousands,  and  cap- 
tains over  hundreds,  which  came  from  the  battle  ;  and 
Moses  said  unto  them,  Have  ye  saved  all  the  women 
alive?  behold,  these  caused  the  children  of  Israel, 
through  the  council  of  Balaam,  to  commit  trespass 
against  the  Lord  in  the  matter  of  Peor,  and  there  was 
a  plague  among  the  congregation  of  the  Lord.  Now, 
therefore,  kill  every  male  among  the  little  ones^  and  kill 
every  woman  that  hath  known  a  man  by  lying  with  him  ; 
but  all  the  women-children^  that  have  not  known  a  man 
by  lying  with  him^  keep  alive  for  yourselves.^'' 

Among  the  detestable  villains  that  in  any  period  of  the 
world  have  disgraced  the  name  of  man,  it  is  impossible 
to  find  a  greater  than  Moses,  if  this  account  be  true. 
Here  is  an  order  to  butcher  the  boys,  to  massacre  the 
mothers,  and  debauch  the  daughters. 

Let  any  mother  put  herself  in  the  situation  of  those 
mothers  ;  one  child  murdered,  another  destined  to  vio- 
lation, and  herself  in  the  hands  of  an  executioner  ;  let 
any  daughter  put  herself  in  the  situation  of  those 
daughters,  destined  as  a  prey  to  the  murderers  of  a 
mother  and  a  brother,  and  what  will  be  their  feelings? 
It  is  in  vain  that  we  attempt  to  impose  upon  nature,  for 
nature  will  have  her  course,  and  the  religion  that  tor- 
tures all  her  social  ties  is  a  false  religion. 

After  this  detestable  order,  follows  an  account  of  the 
plunder  taken,  and  the  manner  of  dividing  it ;  and  here  it 
is  that  the  profaneness  of  priestly  hypocrisy  increases  the 
catalogue  of  crimes.  Ver.  37  to  40, '  ^And  the  Lord''  s  tribute 
of  the  sheep  was  six  hundred  and  three  score  and  fifteen  ; 
and  the  beeves  were  thirty  and  six  thousand,  of  which  the 
Lord'^s  tribute  was  three  score  and  twelve  ;  and  the  asses 
were  thirty  thousand  and  five  hundred,  of  which  the  Lord's 
tribute  was  three  score  and  one ;  and  the  persons  were  six- 


AGE   OF    REASON.  91 

teen  thousand,  of  which  the  Lord's  tribute  was  thirty  and 
two  persons."  In  short,  the  matters  contained  in  this 
chapter,  as  well  as  in  many  other  parts  of  the  Bible,  are 
too  horrid  for  humanity  to  read  or  for  decency  to  hear, 
for  it  appears,  from  the  35th  verse  of  this  chapter,  that 
the  number  of  women-children  consigned  to  debauchery 
by  the  order  of  Moses  was  thirty-two  thousand. 

People  in  general  do  not  know  what  wickedness  there 
is  in  this  pretended  word  of  God.  Brought  up  in 
habits  of  superstition,  they  take  it  for  granted  that  the 
Bible  is  true,  and  that  it  is  good  ;  they  permit  themselves 
not  to  doubt  of  it,  and  they  carry  the  ideas  they  form  cf 
the  benevolence  of  the  Almighty  to  the  book  which  they 
have  been  taught  to  believe  was  written  by  his  authority. 
Good  heavens!  it  is  quite  another  thing;  it  is  a  book  of 
lies,  wickedness,  and  blasphemy  ;  for  what  can  be  greater 
blasphemy  than  to  ascribe  the  wickedness  of  man  to  the 
orders  of  the  Almighty? 

But  to  return  to  my  subject,  that  of  showing  that 
Moses  is  not  the  author  of  the  books  ascribed  to  him,  and 
that  the  Bible  is  spurious.  The  two  instances  I  have  al- 
ready given  would  be  sufficient  without  any  additional 
evidence,  to  invalidate  the  authenticity  of  any  book  that 
pretended  to  be  four  or  five  hundred  years  more  ancient 
than  the  matters  it  speaks  of,  or  refers  to,  as  facts ;  for 
in  the  case  of  pursuing  them  unto  Dan^  and  of  the  kings 
that  reigned  over  the  children  of  Israel^  not  even  the 
flimsy  pretence  of  prophecy  can  be  pleaded.  The  ex- 
pressions are  in  the  preter  tense,  and  it  would  be  down- 
right idiotism  to  say  that  a  man  could  prophecy  in  the 
preter  tense. 

But  there  are  many  other  passages  scattered  through- 
out those  books  that  unite  in  the  same  point  of  evidence. 
It  is  said  in  Exodus,  (another  of  the  books  ascribed  to 
Moses),  chap.  xvi.  verse  34,  "And  the  children  of  Israel 
did   eat   manna  forty  years  until  they  came  to  a  land 


^2  AGE   OF   REASON. 

inhabited;  they  did  eat  manna  until  they  came  unto  tf^ 
borders  of  the  land  of  Canaan. ' ' 

Whether  the  children  of  Israel  ate  manna  or  not,  or 
what  manna  was,  or  whether  it  was  anything  more  than 
a  kind  of  fungus  or  small  mushroom,  or  other  vegetable 
substance  common  to  that  part  of  the  country,  makes 
nothing  to  my  argument ;  all  that  I  mean  to  show  is, 
that  it  is  not  Moses  that  could  write  this  account,  because 
the  account  extends  itself  beyond  the  life  and  time  of 
Moses.  Moses,  according  to  the  Bible,  (but  it  is  such  a 
book  of  lies  and  contradictions  there  is  no  knowing 
which  part  to  believe,  or  whether  any),  died  in  the  wilder- 
ness and  never  came  upon  the  borders  of  the  land  of 
Canaan ;  and  consequently  it  could  not  be  he  that  said 
what  the  children  of  Israel  did,  or  what  they  ate  when 
they  came  there.  This  account  of  eating  manna,  which 
they  tell  us  was  written  by  Moses,  extends  itself  to  the 
time  of  Joshua,  the  successor  of  Moses  ;  as  appears  by 
the  account  given  in  the  book  of  Joshua,  after  the  children 
of  Israel  had  passed  the  river  Jordan,  and  came  unto  the 
borders  of  the  lana  ot  Canaan.  Joshua,  chap,  v.,  verse 
1 2.  '  ^And  the  manna  ceased  on  the  morrow^  after  they  had 
eaten  of  the  old  corn  of  the  land ;  neither  had  the  children 
of  Israel  manna  any  more^  but  they  did  eat  of  the  fruit  of 
the  land  of  Canaan  that  year. ' ' 

But  a  more  remarkable  instance  than  this  occurs  in 
Deuteronomy,  which,  while  it  shows  that  Moses  could 
not  be  the  writer  of  that  book,  shows  also  the  fabulous 
notions  that  prevailed  at  that  time  about  grants.  In  the 
third  chapter  of  Diuterononiy,  among  the  conquests  said 
to  be  made  by  Moses,  is  an  account  of  the  taking  of  Og, 
king  of  Bashan,  v.  1 1.  "  For  only  Og,  king  of  Bashan,  re- 
mained of  the  remnant  of  grants;  behold,  his  bedstead  was 
a  bedstead  of  iron  ;  is  it  not  in  Rabbath  of  the  children 
of  Ammom?  Nine  cubits  was  the  length  thereof,  and 
four  cubits  the  breadth  of  it,  after  the  cubit  of  a  man.** 


AGE   OF    REASON.  93 

A  cubit  is  I  foot  9  888-ioooths  inches ;  the  length,  there- 
fore, of  the  bed  was  16  feet  4  inches,  and  the  breadth  7 
feet  4  inches  ;  thus  much  for  this  giant's  bed.  Now  for 
the  historical  part,  which,  though  the  evidence  is  not  so 
direct  and  positive  as  in  the  former  cases,  it  is  neverthe- 
less very  presumable  and  corroborating  evidence,  and  is 
better  that  the  best  evidence  on  the  contrary  side. 

The  writer,  by  way  of  proving  the  existence  of  this 
giant,  refers  to  his  bed  as  an  ancient  relic^  and  says.  Is 
it  not  in  Rabbath  (or  Rabbah)  of  the  children  of  Am-mon? 
meaning  that  it  is ;  for  such  is  frequently  the  Bible 
method  of  affirming  a  thing.  But  it  could  not  be  Moses 
that  said  this,  because  Moses  could  know  nothing  about 
Rabbah,  nor  of  what  was  in  it.  Rabbah  was  no  a  city 
belonging  to  this  giant  king,  nor  was  it  one  of  the  cities 
that  Moses  took.  The  knowledge,  therefore,  that  this 
bed  was  at  Rabbah,  and  of  the  particulars  of  its  dimen- 
sions, must  be  referred  to  the  time  when  Rabbaii  was 
taken,  and  this  was  not  till  four  hundred  years  after  the 
death  of  Moses  ;  for  which  see  2  Sam.  chap.  xii. ,  ver.  26. 
"Andjoab  (David's  general)  fought  against  Rabbah  of 
the  children  of  Ammon^  and  took  the  royal  city." 

As  I  am  not  undertaking  to  point  out  all  the  contradic- 
tions in  time,  place,  and  circumstance  that  abound  in  the 
books  ascribed  to  Moses,  and  which  prove  to  a  demon- 
stration that  those  books  could  not  have  been  written  by 
Moses,  nor  in  the  time  of  Moses,  I  proceed  to  the  book  of 
Joshua,  and  to  show  that  Joshua  is  not  the  author  of  that 
book,  and  that  it  is  anonymous  and  without  authority. 
The  evidence  I  shall  produce  is  contained  in  the  book 
itself;  I  will  not  go  out  of  the  Bible  for  proof  against  the 
supposed  authenticity  of  the  Bible.  False  testimony  is 
always  good  against  itself. 

Joshua,  according  to  the  first  chapter  of  Joshua,  was 
the  immediate  successor  of  Moses  ;  he  was,  moreover, 
a  military  man,  which  Moses  was  not,  and  he  continued 


94  AGE  OF   REASON. 

as  chief  of  the  people  of  Israel  25  years,  that  is,  from  the 
time  that  Moses  died,  which,  according  to  the  Bible  chro- 
nology, was  145 1  years  before  Christ,  until  1426  years 
before  Christ,  when,  according  to  the  same  chronology, 
Joshua  died.  If,  therefore,  we  find  in  this  book,  said  to 
have  been  written  by  Joshua,  reference  to  facts  done  after 
the  death  of  Joshua,  it  is  evidence  that  Joshua  could  not 
be  the  author ;  and  also  that  the  book  could  not  have 
been  written  till  after  the  time  of  the  latest  fact  which  it 
records.  As  to  the  character  of  the  book,  it  is  horrid  ; 
it  is  a  military  history  of  rapine  and  murder,  as  savage 
and  brutal  cs  those  recorded  of  his  predecessor  in  villainy 
and  hypocrisy,  Moses  ;  and  the  blasphemy  consists,  as 
in  the  former  books,  in  ascribing  those  deeds  to  the  orders 
of  the  Almighty. 

In  the  first  place,  the  book  of  Joshua,  as  is  the  case  in 
the  preceding  books,  is  written  in  the  third  person  ;  it 
is  the  historian  of  Joshua  that  speaks,  for  it  would  have 
been  absurd  and  vain-glorious  that  Joshua  should  say  of 
himself,  as  is  said  of  him  in  the  last  verse  of  the  sixth 
chapter,  that  ^^ his  fame  was  noised  throughout  all  the 
country. ' '     I  now  come  more  immediately  to  the  proof. 

In  the  24th  chapter,  ver.  31,  it  is  said,  "And  Israel 
served  the  Lord  all  the  days  of  Joshua,  and  all  t?ie  days 
of  the  elders  that  overlived  foshua. ' '  Now,  in  the  name 
of  common  sense,  can  it  be  Joshua  that  relates  what  peo- 
ple had  done  after  he  was  dead?  This  account  must  not 
only  have  been  written  by  some  historian  that  lived  after 
Joshua,  but  that  lived  also  after  the  elders  that  outlived 
Joshua. 

There  are  several  passages  of  a  general  meaning  with , 
respect  to  time  scattered  throughout  the  book  of  Joshua, 
that  carries  the  time  in  which  the  book  was  written  to  a 
distance  from  the  time  of  Joshua,  but  without  marking 
by  exclusion  any  particular  time,  as  in  the  passage  above 
quoted.     In  that  passage,  the  time  that  intervened  be- 


AGE  OF   REASON.  95 

tween  the  death  of  Joshua  and  the  death  of  the  elders  is 
excluded  descriptively  and  absolutely,  and  the  evidence 
substantiates  that  the  book  could  not  have  been  written 
till  after  the  death  of  the  last 

But  though  the  passages  to  which  I  allude,  and  which 
I  am  going  to  quote,  do  not  desigTiate  any  particular 
time  by  exclusion,  they  imply  a  time  far  more  distant 
from  the  days  of  Joshua  than  is  contained  between  the 
death  of  Joshua  and  the  death  of  the  elders.  Such  is  the 
passage,  chap,  x.,  ver.  14,  where,  after  giving  an  ac- 
count that  the  sun  stood  still  upon  Gibeon,  and  the  moon 
in  the  valley  of  Ajalon,  at  the  command  of  Joshua  (a  tale 
only  fit  to  amuse  children),  the  passage  says,  "And  there 
was  no  day  like  that,  before  it,  or  after  it,  that  the  Lord 
hearkened  unto  the  voice  of  a  man." 

This  tale  of  the  sun  standing  still  upon  mount  Gibeon, 
and  the  moon  in  the  valley  of  Ajalon,  is  one  of  those 
fables  that  detects  itself.  Such  a  circumstance  could  not 
have  happened  without  being  known  all  over  the  world. 
One  half  would  have  wondered  why  the  sun  did  not  rise, 
and  the  other  why  it  did  not  set ;  and  the  tradition  of  it 
would  be  universal,  whereas  there  is  not  a  nation  in  the 
world  that  knows  anything  about  it.  But  why  must 
the  moon  stand  still  ?  What  occasion  could  there  be  for 
moonlight  in  the  daytime,  and  that  too  while  the  sun 
shone?  As  a  poetical  figure,  the  whole  is  well  enough  ; 
it  is  akin  to  that  in  the  song  of  Deborah  and  Barak,  The 
stars  in  their  courses  fought  against  Sisera;  but  it  is  in- 
ferior to  the  figurative  declaration  of  Mahomet  to  the  per- 
sons who  came  to  expostulate  with  him  on  his  goings  on: 
^''Wert  thou^^^  said  he,  ^''to  come  to  me  with  the  sun  in  thy 
right  hand  and  the  moon  in  thy  left^  it  should  not  alter  my 
career. ' '  For  Joshua  to  have  exceeded  Mahomet,  he  should 
have  put  the  sun  and  moon  one  in  each  pocket,  and  carried 
them  as  Guy  Fawkes  carried  his  dark  lantern,  and  taken 
them  out  to  shine  as  he  might  happen  to  want  them. 


^6  AGE  OF   REASON. 

The  sublime  and  the  ridiculous  are  often  so  nearly  re- 
lated that  it  is  diflScult  to  class  them  separately.  One 
step  above  the  sublime  makes  the  ridiculous,  and  one 
step  above  the  ridiculous  makes  the  sublime  again  ;  the 
account,  however,  abstracted  from  the  poetical  fancy, 
shows  the  ignorance  of  Joshua,  for  he  should  have  com- 
manded the  earth  to  have  stood  still. 

The  time  implied  by  the  expression  after  it,  that  is, 
after  that  day,  being  put  in  comparison  with  all  the  time 
that  passed  before  it,  must,  in  order  to  give  any  ex- 
pressive signification  to  the  passage,  mean  a  great  length 
of  time:  for  example,  it  would  have  been  ridiculous  to 
have  said  so  the  next  day,  or  the  next  week,  or  the  next 
month,  or  the  next  year  ;  to  give,  therefore,  meaning  to 
the  passage,  comparative  with  the  wonder  it  relates  and 
the  prior  time  it  alludes  to,  it  must  mean  centuries  of 
years  ;  less,  however,  than  one  would  be  trifling,  and 
less  than  two  would  be  barely  admissible. 

A  distant  but  general  time  is  also  expressed  in  the  8th 
chapter,  where,  after  giving  an  account  of  the  taking  of 
the  city  of  Ai,  it  is  said,  ver.  28,  "And  Joshua  burned 
Ai,  and  made  it  a  heap  forever,  even  a  desolation  unto  this 
day; ' '  and  again,  ver.  29,  where,  speaking  of  the  king 
of  Ai,  whom  Joshua  had  hanged,  and  buried  at  the  en- 
tering of  the  gate,  it  is  said,  "And  he  raised  thereon  a 
great  heap  of  stones,  which  remaineth  unto  this  day," 
that  is,  unto  the  day  or  time  in  which  the  writer  of  the 
book  of  Joshua  lived.  And  again,  in  the  loth  chapter, 
where,  after  speaking  of  the  five  kings  whom  Joshua  had 
hanged  on  five  trees,  and  then  thrown  in  a  cave,  it  is 
said,  "And  he  laid  great  stones  on  the  cave's  mouth, 
which  remain  unto  this  very  day." 

In  enumerating  the  several  exploits  of  Joshua,  and  of 
the  tribes,  and  of  the  places  which  they  conquered  or  at- 
tempted, it  is  said,  chap,  xv.,  ver.  63  :  "As  for  the 
Jebusites,  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  the  children  of 


AGE   OF   REASON.  97 

Judah  could  not  drive  them  out ;  but  the  Jebusites  dwell 
with  the  children  of  Judah  at  Jerusalem  unto  this  day.'*'' 
The  question  upon  this  passage  is,  at  what  time  did  the 
Jebusites  and  the  children  of  Judah  dwell  together  at 
Jerusalem?  As  this  matter  occurs  again  in  the  first 
chapter  of  Judges,  I  shall  reserve  my  observations  until 
I  come  to  that  part. 

Having  thus  shown  from  the  book  of  Joshua  itself, 
without  any  auxiliary  evidence  whatever,  that  Joshua  is 
not  the  author  of  that  book,  and  that  it  is  anonymous, 
and  consequently  without  authority,  I  proceed  as  be- 
fore mentioned,  to  the  book  of  Judges. 

The  book  of  Judges  is  anonymous  on  the  face  of  it ; 
and,  therefore,  even  the  pretence  is  wanting  to  call  it  the 
word  of  God  ;  it  has  not  so  much  as  a  nominal  voucher  ; 
it  is  altogether  fatherless. 

This  book  begins  with  the  same  expression  as  the  book 
of  Joshua.  That  of  Joshua  begins,  chap,  i.,  verse  i, 
*  *  Now  after  the  death  of  Moses ^ ' '  etc. ,  and  this  of  the 
Judges  begins,  * '  Now  after  the  death  of  Joshua^  etc. 
This,  and  the  similarity  of  style  between  the  two  books, 
indicate  that  they  are  the  work  of  the  same  author,  but 
who  he  was  is  altogether  unknown  ;  the  only  point  that  the 
book  proves,  is  that  the  author  lived  long  after  the  time  of 
Joshua  ;  for  though  it  begins  as  if  it  followed  immedi- 
ately after  his  death,  the  second  chapter  is  an  epitome  or 
abstract  of  the  whole  book,  which,  according  to  the  Bible 
chronology,  extends  its  history'  through  a  space  of  306 
years ;  that  is,  from  the  death  of  Joshua,  1426  years  be- 
fore Christ,  to  the  death  of  Samson,  1 1 20  years  before 
Christ,  and  only  25  years  before  Saul  went  to  seek  his 
father's  asses ^  and  was  made  king.  But  there  is  good 
reason  to  believe,  that  it  was  not  written  till  the  time  of 
David,  at  least,  and  that  the  book  of  Joshua  was  not 
written  before  the  same  time. 

In  the  first  chapter  of  Judges,   the  writer,   after  an- 


98  AGE  OF  REASON. 

noun cing  the  death  of  Joshua,  proceeds  to  tell  what  hap- 
pened between  the  children  of  Judah  and  the  native  in- 
habitants of  the  land  of  Canaan.  In  this  statement,  the 
writer,  having  abruptly  mentioned  Jerusalem  in  the  7th 
verse,  says  immediately  after,  in  the  8th  verse,  by  way 
of  explanation,  "Now  the  children  of  Judah  ^^(a^  fought 
against  Jerusalem,  and  had  taken  it ; "  consequently  this 
book  could  not  have  been  written  before  Jerusalem  had 
been  taken.  The  reader  will  recollect  the  quotation  I  have 
just  before  made  from  the  15th  chapter  of  Joshua,  ver. 
63,  where  it  is  said  that  ths  Jebusites  dwell  with  the 
children  of  Judah  atjerusaleijt  unto  this  day^  meaning  the 
time  when  the  book  of  Joshua  was  written. 

The  evidence  I  have  already  produced  to  prove  that  the 
books  I  have  hitherto  treated  of  were  not  written  by  the 
persons  to  whom  they  are  ascribed,  nor  till  many  years 
after  their  death,  if  such  persons  ever  lived,  is  already  so 
abundant  that  I  can  afford  to  admit  this  passage  with  less 
weight  than  I  am  entitled  to  draw  from  it.  For  the  case 
is,  that  so  far  as  the  Bible  can  be  credited  as  a  history,  the 
city  of  Jerusalem  was  not  taken  till  the  time  of  David  ; 
and  consequently  that  the  books  of  Joshua  and  of  Judges 
were  not  written  till  after  the  commencement  of  the  reign 
of  David,  which  was  370  years  after  the  death  of  Joshua. 

The  name  of  the  city  that  was  afterward  called  Jeru- 
salem was  originally  Jebus,  or  Jebusi,  and  was  the  capital 
of  the  Jebusites.  The  account  of  David's  taking  this 
city  is  given  in  II.  Samuel,  chap.  v. ,  ver.  4,  etc. ;  also  in  I. 
Chron.  chap,  xiv.,  ver.  4,  etc.  There  is  no  mention  in 
any  part  of  the  Bible  that  it  was  ever  taken  before,  nor 
any  account  that  favors  such  an  opinion.  It  is  not  said, 
either  in  Samuel  or  in  Chronicles,  that  they  utterly  de- 
stroyed men^  women  and  children ;  that  they  left  not  a 
soul  to  breathe^  as  is  said  of  their  other  conquests  ;  and 
the  silence  here  observed  implies  that  it  was  taken  by 
capitulation,  and  that  the  Jebusites,  the  native   inhab- 


AGB  OP  REASON.  99 

itants,  continued  to  live  in  the  place  after  it  was  taken. 
The  account  therefore,  given  in  Joshua,  that  the Jebu- 
sites  dwell  with  the  children  of  Judah  at  Jerusalem  unto 
this  day  corresponds  to  no  other  time  than  after  the 
taking  of  the  city  by  David. 

Having  now  shown  that  every  book  in  the  Bible,  from 
Genesis  to  Judges,  is  without  authenticity,  I  come  to  the 
bookof  Rutli,  an  idle,  bungling  story,  foolishly  told,  no- 
body knows  by  whom,  about  a  strolling  country-girl 
creeping  slyly  to  bed  with  her  cousin  Boaz.  Pretty  stuff 
indeed  to  be  called  the  word  of  God  !  It  is,  however,  one 
of  the  best  books  in  the  Bible,  for  it  is  free  from  murder 
and  rapine. 

I  come  next  to  the  two  books  of  Samuel,  and  to  show 
that  those  books  were  not  written  by  Samuel,  nor  till  a 
great  length  of  time  after  the  death  of  Samuel ;  and  that 
they  are,  like  all  the  former  books,  anonymous  and  with- 
out authority. 

To  be  convinced  that  these  books  have  been  written 
much  later  than  the  time  of  Samuel,  and  consequently 
not  by  him,  it  is  only  necessary  to  read  the  account  which 
the  writer  gives  of  Saul  going  to  seek  his  father's  asses, 
and  of  his  interview  with  Samuel,  of  whom  Saul  went  to 
inquire  about  those  lost  asses,  as  foolish  people  nowadays 
go  to  a  conjuror  to  inquire  after  lost  things. 

The  writer,  in  relating  this  story  of  Saul,  Samuel  and 
the  asses,  does  not  tell  it  as  a  thing  that  has  just  then 
happened,  but  as  an  ancient  story  in  the  time  this  writer 
lived;  for  he  tells  it  in  the  language  or  terms  used  at  the 
time  that  Samuel  lived,  which  obliges  the  writer  to  ex- 
plain the  story  in  the  terms  or  language  used  in  the 
time  the  writer  lived. 

Samuel,  in  the  account  given  of  him,  in  the  first  of 
those  books,  chap  ix.,  is  called  the  seer ;  and  it  is  by  this 
term  that  Saul  inquires  after  him,  ver.  11,  *'And  as  they 
(Saul  and  his  servant)  went  up  the  hill  to  the  city,  they 


ICX>  AGE   OF   REASON. 

found  young  maidens  going  out  to  draw  water  ;  and  they 
said  unto  them,  Is  the  seer  here  ? ' '  Saul  then  went  ac- 
cording to  the  direction  of  these  maidens,  and  met  Sam- 
uel without  knowing  him,  and  said  unto  him,  ver.  i8, 
"Tell  me,  I  pray  thee,  where  the  seer" s  house  is?  and 
Samuel  answered  Saul,  and  said,  /  am  the  seer. ' ' 

As  the  writer  of  the  book  of  Samuel  relates  these  ques- 
tions and  answers,  in  the  language  or  manner  of  speaking 
used  in  the  time  they  are  said  to  have  been  spoken,  and 
as  that  manner  of  speaking  was  out  of  use  when  this 
author  wrote,  he  found  it  necessary,  in  order  to  make  the 
story  understood,  to  explain  the  terms  in  which  these 
questions  and  answers  are  spoken  ;  and  he  does  this  in 
the  9th  verse,  when  he  says  ''''Before-time^  in  Israel, 
when  a  man  went  to  inquire  of  God,  thus  he  spake, 
Come,  and  let  us  go  to  the  seer  ;  for  he  that  is  now  called  a 
Prophet,  was  before-tim.e  called  a  Seer. "  This  proves, 
as  I  have  before  said,  that  this  story  of  Saul,  Samuel  and 
the  asses,  was  an  ancient  story  at  the  time  the  book  of 
Samuel  was  written,  and  consequently  that  Samuel  did  not 
write  it,  and  that  that  book  is  without  authenticity. 

But  if  we  go  further  into  those  books  the  evidence  is 
still  more  positive  that  Samuel  is  not  the  writer  of  them  ; 
for  they  relate  things  that  did  not  happen  till  several 
years  after  the  death  of  Samuel.  Samuel  died  before 
Saul  ;  for  the  ist  Samuel,  chap,  xxviii. ,  tells  that  Saul 
and  the  witch  of  Endor  conjured  Samuel  up  after  he  was 
dead  ;  yet  the  history  of  the  matters  contained  in  those 
books  is  extended  through  the  remaining  part  of  Saul's 
life,  and  to  the  latter  end  of  the  life  of  David,  who  suc- 
ceeded Saul.  The  account  of  the  death  and  burial  of 
Samuel  (a  thing  which  he  could  not  write  himself)  is  re- 
lated in  the  25th  chapter  of  the  first  book  of  Samuel,  and 
the  chronology  affixed  to  this  chapter  makes  this  to  be 
1060  years  before  Christ ;  yet  the  history  of  this  first 
book  is  brought  down  to  1056  years  before  Christ  ;  that 


AGE  OF   RBASON.  lOI 

is,  till  the  death  of  Saul,   which  was  not  till  four  years 
after  the  death  of  Samuel. 

The  second  book  of  Samuel  begins  with  an  account  of 
things  that  did  not  happen  till  four  years  after  Samuel 
was  dead  ;  for  it  begins  with  the  reign  of  David,  who 
succeeded  Saul,  and  it  goes  on  to  the  end  of  David's 
reig^,  which  was  forty-three  years  after  the  death  of 
Samuel ;  and,  therefore,  the  books  are  in  themselves 
positive  evidence  that  they  were  not  written  by  Samuel. 

I  have  now  gone  through  all  tha  books  in  the  first  part 
of  the  Bible  to  which  the  names  of  persons  are  affixed,  as 
being  the  authors  of  those  books,  and  which  the  Church, 
styling  itself  the  Christian  Church,  have  imposed  upon 
the  world  as  the  writings  of  Moses,  Joshua  and  Samuel, 
and  I  have  detected  and  proved  the  falsehood  of  this  im- 
position. And  now,  ye  priests  of  every  description, 
who  have  preached  and  written  against  the  former  part 
of  the  Age  of  Reason^  what  have  ye  to  say  ?  Will  ye, 
with  all  this  mass  of  evidence  against  you,  and  staring 
you  in  the  face,  still  have  the  assurance  to  march  into 
your  pulpits  and  continue  to  impose  these  books  on  your 
congregations  as  the  works  of  inspired  penmen^  and  the 
word  of  God,  when  it  is  as  evident  as  demonstration  can 
make  truth  appear,  that  the  persons  who  ye  say  are  the 
authors,  are  not  the  authors,  and  that  ye  know  not  who 
the  authors  are.  What  shadow  of  pretence  have  ye  now 
to  produce  for  continuing  the  blasphemous  fraud  ?  What 
have  ye  still  to  offer  against  the  pure  and  moral  religion 
of  Deism,  in  support  of  your  system  of  falsehood,  idola- 
try, and  pretended  revelation  ?  Had  the  cruel  and  mur- 
derous orders  with  which  the  Bible  is  filled,  and  the 
numberless  torturing  executions  of  men,  women  and 
children,  in  consequence  of  those  orders,  been  ascribed 
to  some  friend  whose  memory  you  revered,  you  would 
have  glowed  with  satisfaction  at  detecting  the  falsehood 
of  the  charge,  and  gloried  in  defending  his  injured  fame. 


I03  AGE  OF   REASON. 

Is  it  because  ye  are  sunk  in  the  cruelty  of  superstition, 
or  feel  no  interest  in  the  honor  of  your  Creator,  that  ye 
listen  to  the  horrid  tales  of  the  Bible,  or  hear  them  with 
callous  indifference?  The  evidence  I  have  produced,  and 
shall  produce  in  the  course  of  this  work,  to  prove  that 
the  Bible  is  without  authority,  will,  while  is  wounds  the 
stubbornness  of  a  priest,  relieve  and  tranquilize  the 
minds  of  millions  ;  it  will  free  them  from  all  those  hard 
thoughts  of  the  Almighty  which  priestcraft  and  the  Bible 
had  infused  into  their  minds,  and  which  stood  in  ever- 
lasting opposition  to  all  their  ideas  of  his  moral  justice 
and  benevolence. 

I  come  now  to  the  two  books  of  Kings,  and  the  two 
books  of  Chronicles.  Those  books  are  altogether  his- 
torical, and  are  chiefly  confined  to  the  lives  and  actions 
of  the  Jewish  kings,  who  in  general  were  a  parcel  of 
rascals ;  but  these  are  matters  with  which  we  have  no 
more  concern  than  we  have  with  the  Roman  emperors  or 
Homer's  account  of  the  Trojan  war.  Besides  which,  as 
those  works  are  anonymous,  and  as  we  know  nothing  of 
the  writer,  or  of  his  character,  it  is  impossible  for  us  to 
know  what  degree  of  credit  to  give  to  the  matters  related 
therein.  Like  all  other  ancient  histories,  they  appear  to 
be  a  jumble  of  fable  and  of  fact,  and  of  probable  and  of 
improbable  things  ;  but  which  distance  of  time  and  place, 
and  change  of  circumstances  in  the  world,  have  rendered 
obsolete  and  uninteresting. 

The  chief  use  I  shall  make  of  those  books  will  be  that 
of  comparing  them  with  each  other,  and  with  other  parts 
of  the  Bible,  to  show  the  confusion,  contradiction,  and 
cruelty  in  this  pretended  word  of  God. 

The  first  book  of  Kings  begins  with  the  reign  of  Solo- 
mon, which,  according  to  the  Bible  chronology,  was  1015 
years  before  Christ ;  and  the  second  book  ends  588  years 
before  Christ,  being  a  little  after  the  reign  of  Zedekiah, 
whom  Nebuchadnezzar,  after  taking  Jerusalem  and  con- 


AGB  OF   REASON.  IO3 

quering  the  Jews,  carried  captive  to  Babylon.     The  two 

books  include  a  space  of  427  years. 

The  two  books  of  Chronicles  are  a  history  of  the  same 
times,  and  in  general  of  the  same  persons,  by  another 
author  ;  for  it  would  be  absurd  to  suppose  that  the  same 
author  wrote  the  history  twice  over.  The  first  book  of 
Chronicles  (after  giving  the  genealogy  from  Adam  to 
Saul,  which  takes  up  the  first  nine  chapters),  begins 
with  the  reign  of  David  ;  and  the  last  book  ends  as  in 
the  last  book  of  Kings,  soon  after  the  reign  of  Zedekiah, 
about  588  years  before  Christ.  The  two  last  verses  of 
the  last  chapter  bring  the  history  forward  52  years  more, 
that  is,  to  536.  But  these  verses  do  not  belong  to  the  book, 
as  I  shall  show  when  I  come  to  speak  of  the  book  of  Ezra. 

The  two  books  of  Kings,  besides  the  history  of  Saul, 
David  and  Solomon,  who  reigned  over  all  Israel,  contain 
an  abstract  of  the  lives  of  17  kings  and  one  queen,  who  are 
styled  kings  of  Judah,  and  of  19,  who  are  styled  kings  of 
Israel  ;  for  the  Jewish  nation,  immediately  on  the  death  of 
Solomon,  split  into  two  parties,  who  chose  separate  kings, 
and  who  carried  on  most  rancorous  wars  against  each  other. 

These  two  books  are  little  more  than  a  history  of  assas- 
sinations, treachery  and  wars.  The  cruelties  that  the  Jews 
had  accustomed  themselves  to  practise  on  the  Canaan- 
ites,  whose  country  they  had  savagely  invaded  under 
a  pretended  gift  from  God,  they  afterward  practised  as 
furiously  on  each  other.  Scarcely  half  their  kings  died 
a  natural  death,  and  in  some  instances  whole  families 
were  destroyed  to  secure  possession  to  the  successor ;  who, 
after  a  few  years,  and  sometimes  only  a  few  months  or 
less,  shared  the  same  fate.  In  the  tenth  chapter  of  the 
second  book  of  Kings,  an  account  is  given  of  two  baskets 
full  of  children's  heads,  seventy  in  number,  being  ex- 
posed at  the  entrance  of  the  city  ;  they  were  the  children 
of  Ahab,  and  were  murdered  by  the  order  of  Jehu, 
whom  Elisha,  the  pretended  man  of  God,  had  anointed 


104  AGE   OF    REASON. 

to  be  king  over  Israel,  on  purpose  to  commit  this  bloody 
deed,  and  assassinate  his  predecessor.  And  in  the  ac- 
count of  the  reign  of  Menahem,  one  of  the  kings  of  Is- 
rael who  had  murdered  Shallum,  who  had  reigned  but 
one  month,  it  is  said,  II.  Kings,  chap,  xv.,  ver.  i6,  that 
Menahem  smote  the  city  of  Tiphsah,  because  they 
opened  not  the  city  to  him,  and  all  the  women  therein 
that  were  with  child  he  ripped  up. 

Could  we  permit  ourselves  to  suppose  that  the  Al- 
mighty would  distinguish  any  nation  of  people  by  the 
name  oi  His  chosen  people.,  we  must  suppose  that  people 
to  have  been  an  example  to  all  the  rest  of  the  world  of 
the  purest  piety  and  humanity,  and  not  such  a  nation  of 
ruffians  and  cut-throats  as  the  ancient  Jews  were  ;  a  peo- 
ple who,  corrupted  by  and  copying  after  such  monsters 
and  impostors  as  Moses  and  Aaron,  Joshua,  Samuel  and 
David,  had  distinguished  themselves  above  all  others  on 
the  face  of  the  known  earth  for  barbarity  and  wickedness. 
If  we  will  not  stubbornly  shut  our  eyes  and  steel  our 
hearts,  it  is  impossible  not  to  see,  in  spite  of  all  that  long- 
established  superstition  imposes  upon  the  mind,  that  the 
flattering  appellation  oi  His  chosen  people  is  no  other  than 
a  lie  which  the  priests  and  leaders  of  the  Jews  had  in- 
vented to  cover  the  baseness  of  their  own  characters, 
and  which  Christian  priests, .  sometimes  as  corrupt  and 
often  as  cruel,  have  professed  to  believe. 

The  two  books  of  Chronicles  are  a  repetition  of  the 
same  crimes,  but  the  history  is  broken  in  several  places 
by  the  author  leaving  out  the  reign  of  some  of  their 
kings  ;  and  in  this,  as  well  as  in  that  of  Kings,  there  is 
such  a  frequent  transition  from  kings  of  Judah  to  kings 
of  Israel,  and  from  kings  of  Israel  to  kings  of  Judah,  that 
the  narrative  is  obscure  in  the  reading.  In  the  same  book 
the  history  sometimes  contradicts  itself;  for  example, 
in  the  second  book  of  Kings,  chap,  i.,  ver.  17,  we  are  told, 
but  in  rather  ambiguous  terms,  that  after  the  death  of 


AGB  OP    R  BASON.  105 

Ahaziah,  king  of  Israel,  Jehoram,  or  Joram  (who  was  of 
the  house  of  Ahab),  reigned  in  his  stead,  in  the  second 
year  of  Jehoram,  or  Joram,  son  of  Jehoshaphat,  king  of 
Judah  ;  and  in  chap,  viii.,  ver.  16,  of  the  same  book,  it  is 
said,  and  in  \\\^ fifth  year  of  Joram,  the  son  of  Ahab,  king 
of  Israel,  Jehoshaphat  being  then  king  of  Judah,  began  to 
reign  ;  that  is,  one  chapter  says  Joram  of  Judah  began  to 
reign  in  the  second  year  oi'^oxdiVa.  of  Israel ;  and  the  other 
chapter  says,  that  Joram  of  Israel  began  to  reign  in  the 
fifth  year  oi  ^oraxa.  of  Judah. 

Several  of  the  most  extraordinary  matters  related  in  one 
history,  as  having  happened  during  the  reign  of  such 
and  such  of  their  kings,  are  not  to  be  found  in  the  other, 
in  relating  the  reign  of  the  same  king  ;  for  example,  the 
two  first  rival  kings,  after  the  death  of  Solomon,  were 
Rehoboam  and  Jeroboam ;  and  in  I.  Kings,  chap,  xii 
and  xiii,  an  account  is  g^ven  of  Jeroboam  making  an  of- 
fering of  burnt  incense,  and  that  a  man,  who  was  there 
called  a  man  of  God,  cried  out  against  the  altar,  chap, 
xiii.,  ver.  2  :  "O  altar,  altar  !  thus  saith  the  Lord;  Be- 
hold, a  child  shall  be  bom  to  the  house  of  David,  Josiah 
by  name  ;  and  upon  thee  shall  he  offer  the  priests  of  the 
high  places  that  bum  incense  upon  thee,  and  men's 
bones  shall  be  burnt  upon  thee. ' '  Verse  4 :  "  And  it 
came  to  pass,  when  king  Jeroboam  heard  the  saying  of 
the  man  of  God,  which  had  cried  against  the  altar  in 
Bethel,  that  he  put  forth  his  hand  from  the  altar,  saying. 
Lay  hold  on  him.  And  his  hand  which  he  put  out  against 
him  dried  up^  so  that  he  could  not  pull  it  in  again  tohim.^^ 

One  would  think  that  such  an  extraordinary  case  as 
this  (which  is  spoken  of  as  a  judgment),  happening  to 
the  chief  of  one  of  the  parties,  and  that  at  the  first 
moment  of  the  separation  of  the  Israelites  into  two 
nations,  would,  if  it  had  been  true,  have  been  recorded  in 
both  histories.  But  though  men  in  latter  times  have 
believed  all  that  the  prophets  have  said  unto  them^  it  does 


I06  AGE  OF   REASON. 

not  appear  that  these  prophets  or  historians  believed  each 
other ;  they  knew  each  other  too  well. 

A  long  account  also  is  given  in  Kings  about  Elijah. 
It  runs  through  several  chapters,  and  concludes  with 
telling,  II.  Kings,  chap,  ii.,  ver.  ii,  "  And  it  came  to  pass, 
as  they  (Elijah  and  Elisha)  still  went  on,  and  talked, 
that,  behold,  there  appeared  a  chariot  of  fire  and  horses 
offire^  and  parted  them  both  asunder,  and  Elijah  went 
up  by  a  whirlwind  into  heaven^  Hum  !  this  the  author 
of  Chronicles,  miraculous  as  the  stor/  is,  makes  no  men- 
tion of,  though  he  mentions  Elijah  by  name;  neither 
does  he  say  anything  of  the  stors'  related  in  the  second 
chapter  of  the  same  book  of  Kings,  of  a  parcel  of  child- 
ren calling  Elisha  bald  liead^  bald  head ;  and  that  this 
man  of  God^  verse  24,  "Turned  back,  and  looked  en 
them,  a7td  cursed  them  in  the  name  of  the  Lord;  and 
there  came  forth  two  she-bears  out  of  the  wood,  and  tore 
forty-and-two  children  of  them."  He  also  passes  over  in 
silence  the  story  told,  II.  Kings,  chap,  xiii.,  that  when 
they  were  burj-ing  a  man  in  the  sepulchre  where  Elisha 
had  been  buried,  it  happened  that  the  dead  man,  as  they 
were  letting  him  down,  (ver.  21),  touched  the  bones  of 
Elisha,  and  he  (the  dead  man)  revived^  and  stood  upon 
his  feet.''''  The  story  does  not  tell  us  whether  they  buried 
the  man,  notwithstanding  he  revived  and  stood  upon  his 
feet,  or  drew  him  up  again.  Upon  all  these  stories  the 
writer  of  Chronicles  is  as  silent  as  any  writer  of  the  present 
day  who  did  not  choose  to  be  accused  of  lyings  or  at  least 
of  romancing,  would  be  about  stories  of  the  same  kind. 

But,  however  these  two  historians  may  differ  from  each 
other  with  respect  to  the  tales  related  by  either,  they 
are  silent  alike  with  respect  to  those  men  styled  prophets, 
whose  writings  fill  up  the  latter  part  of  the  Bible.  Isaiah, 
who  lived  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah,  is  mentioned  in 
Kings,  and  again  in  Chronicles,  when  these  historians 
are  speaking  of  that  reign  ;  but,  except  in  one  or  two  in- 


AGE  OP  REASON. 


107 


stances  at  most,  and  those  very  slightly,  none  of  the  rest  are 
so  much  as  spoken  of,  or  even  their  existence  hinted  at ; 
although,  according  to  the  Bible  chronology,  they  lived 
within  the  time  those  histories  were  written ;  some  of  them 
long  before.  If  those  prophets,  as  they  are  called,  were 
men  of  such  importance  in  their  day  as  the  compilers 
of  the  Bible  and  priests  and  commentators  have  since 
represented  them  to  be,  how  can  it  be  accounted  for  that 
not  one  of  these  histories  should  say  anything  about  them? 

The  liistor}'  in  the  books  of  Kings  and  of  Chronicles  is 
brought  forward,  as  I  have  already  said,  to  the  year  588 
before  Christ  ;  it  will,  therefore,  be  proper  to  examine 
which  of  these  prophets  lived  before  that  period. 

Here  follows  a  table  of  all  the  prophets,  with  the  times 
in  which  they  lived  before  Christ,  according  to  the  chro- 
nology aflSxed  to  the  first  chapter  of  each  of  the  books  of  the 
prophets ;  and  also  of  the  number  of  years  they  lived 
before  the  books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles  were  written. 
Table  of  the  Prophets. 


Names. 

Years 
before 
Christ. 

Years  before 
Kings  and 
Chronicles. 

Observations. 

Isaiah 

Jeremiah    .... 

Ezekiel 

Daniel 

Hosea 

Joel 

Amos 

Obadiah     .... 

Jonah      

Micah 

Nahum 

Habakkuk.    .    .     . 
Zephaniah.     .     .     . 

&r!ah|e^^-the 
Malachi     J  yea'' 588 

760 
629 

595 
607 
785 
800 

789 
789 
862 

750 
713 
620 
630 

172 
41 

7 

19 

97 

212 

199 

199 

274 
162 

42 

mentioned. 

f  mentioned  only  in  the 

( last  cliap.  of  Chron. 

not  mentioned. 

not  mentioned. 

not  mentioned. 

not  mentioned 

not  mentioned. 

not  mentioned 

see  tlie  note.* 

not  mentioned. 

not  mentioned. 

not  mentioned. 

not  mentioned. 

*  III  II.  Kings,  chap,  xi  v..  verse  35.  the  tiatne  of  Jonah  is  mentioned  on  account  of  the 
restoration  ofa  tract  of  lan.l  by  Jeroboam;  but  11  (thing  further  is  said  of  him  nor  is 
anv  alhision  made  to  the  book  ol  Jonah,  nor  to  bis  exi>editioa  to  Nineveh,  uor  U>  bis 
encounter  with  the  whale. 


I08  AGE   OF   REASON. 

This  table  is  either  not  very  honorable  for  the  Bible 
historians,  or  not  very  honorable  for  the  Bible  prophets  ; 
and  I  leave  to  priests  and  commentators,  who  are  very 
learned  in  little  things,  to  settle  the  point  of  eti- 
quette between  the  two,  and  to  assign  a  reason  why  the 
authors  of  Kings  and  Chronicles  have  treated  those 
prophets  whom,  in  the  former  part  of  the  Age  of  Reason^ 
I  have  considered  as  poets,  with  as  much  degrading 
silence  as  any  historian  of  the  present  day  would  treat 
Peter  Pindar. 

I  have  one  observation  more  to  make  on  the  book  of 
Chronicles,  after  which  I  shall  pass  on  to  review  the  re- 
maining books  of  the  Bible. 

In  my  observations  on  the  book  of  Genesis,  I  have 
quoted  a  passage  from  the  36th  chapter,  verse  31,  which 
evidently  refers  to  a  time  after  kings  began  to  reign 
over  the  children  of  Israel ;  and  I  have  shown  that  as  this 
verse  is  verbatim  the  same  as  in  Chronicles,  chap,  i, 
verse  43,  where  it  stands  consistently  with  the  order  of 
history,  which  in  Genesis  it  does  not,  that  the  verse  in 
Genesis,  and  a  great  part  of  the  36th  chapter,  have  been 
taken  from  Chronicles ;  and  that  the  book  of  Genesis, 
though  it  is  placed  first  in  the  Bible,  and  ascribed  to 
Moses,  has  been  manufactured  by  some  unknown  person 
after  the  book  of  Chronicles  was  written,  which  was  not 
until  at  least  eight  hundred  and  sixty  years  after  the 
time  of  Moses. 

The  evidence  I  proceed  by  to  substantiate  this  is  regu- 
lar and  has  in  it  but  two  stages.  First,  as  I  have  already 
stated  that  the  passage  in  Genesis  refers  itself  for  time  to 
Chronicles  ;  secondly,  that  the  book  of  Chronicles,  to 
which  this  passage  refers  itself,  was  not  begun  to  be 
written  until  at  least  eight  hundred  and  sixty  years  after 
the  time  of  Moses.  To  prove  this,  we  have  only  to  look 
into  the  thirteenth  verse  of  the  third  chapter  of  the  first 
book  of  Chronicles,  where  the  writer,  in  giving  the  gene- 


AGE   OF    REASON.  IO9 

alogy  of  the  descendants  of  David,  mentions  Zedekiah; 
and  it  was  in  the  time  of  Zedekiah  that  Nebnchadnezzar 
conquered  Jerusalem,  588  years  before  Christ,  and  conse- 
quently more  then  860  years  after  Moses.  Those  who 
have  superstitiously  boastedof  the  antiquity  of  the  Bible, 
and  particularly  of  the  books  ascribed  to  Moses,  have 
done  it  without  examination,  and  without  any  authority 
than  that  of  one  credulous  man  telling  it  to  another  ;  for 
so  far  as  historical  and  chronological  evidence  applies, 
the  very  first  book  in  the  Bible  is  not  so  ancient  as  the 
book  of  Homer  by  more  then  three  hundred  years,  and 
is  about  the  same  age  with  ^sop's  Fables. 

I  am  not  contending  for  the  morality  of  Homer;  on  the 
contrary,  I  think  it  a  book  of  false  glory,  tending  to  in- 
spire immoral  and  mischievous  notions  of  honor ;  and 
with  respect  to  ^sop,  though  the  moral  is  in  general 
just,  the  fable  is  often  cruel  ;  and  the  cruelty  of  the  fable 
does  more  injury  to  the  heart,  especially  in  a  child,  than 
the  moral  does  good  to  the  judgment. 

Having  now  dismissed  Kings  and  Chronicles,  I  come 
to  the  next  in  course,  the  book  of  Ezra. 

As  one  proof,  among  others  I  shall  produce,  to  show 
the  disorder  in  which  this  pretended  word  of  God,  the 
Bible,  has  been  put  together,  and  the  uncertainty  of  who 
the  authors  were,  we  have  only  to  look  at  the  three  first 
verses  in  Ezra,  and  the  last  two  in  Chronicles ;  for  by 
what  kind  of  cutting  and  shuffling  has  it  been  that  the 
three  first  veses  in  Ezra  should  be  the  two  last  verses 
in  Chronicles,  or  that  the  two  last  in  Chronicles  should 
be  the  three  first  in  Ezra?  Either  the  authors  did  not 
know  their  own  works,  or  the  compilers  did  not  know 
the  authors. 

The  last  verse  in  Chronicles  is  broken  abruptly,  and 
end  in  the  middle  of  the  phrase  with  the  word  «/,  with- 
out signifying  to  what  place.  This  abrupt  break,  and 
the  appearance  of  the   same   verses  in  different  books, 


no 


AGE  OP   REASON. 


show,  as  I  have  already  said,  the  disorder  and  ignorance 
in  which  the  Bible  has  been  put  together,  and  that  the 
compilers  of  it  had  no  authority  for  what  they  were 
doing,  nor  we  any  authority  for  believing  what  they  have 
done.  * 


Three  first  verses  of  Ezra. 
Ver.  I.  Now  in  the  first  year 
of  Cyrus,  king  of  Persia,  that  the 
word  of  the  Lord,  by  the  mouth 
of  Jeremiah,  might  be  fulfilled, 
the  Lord  stirred  up  the  spirit  of 
Cyrus,  king  of  Persia,  that  he 
made  a  proclamation  throughout 
all  his  kingdom,  and  put  it  also 
in  writing,  saying. 

2.  Thus  saith  Cyrus,  king  of 
Persia,  the  Lord  God  of  heaven 
hath  given  me  all  the  kingdoms 
of  the  earth ;  and  he  hath  charged 
me  to  build  him  an  house  at 
Jerusalem,  which  is  in  Judah. 

3.  Wiio  is  tliere  among  you 
of  all  his  people  ?  his  God  be 
with  him,  and  let  him  go  up  to 

Jerusalem,  which  is  in  yndah, 
and  build  the  house  of  the  Lord 
God  of  Israel,  {he  is  the  God,) 
which  is  in  'Jerusalem. 

The  only  thing  that  has  any  appearance  of  certainty  in 
the  book  of  Ezra,  is  the  time  in  which  it  was  written, 
which  was  immediately  after  the  return  of  the  Jews  from 

•I  observed,  as  I  passed  along,  several  broken  and  senseless  passages  in  the  Bible, 
without  thinking  them  of  consequence  enough  to  be  introduced  in  the  body  of  the 
work  ;  such  as  that,  I.  Samuel,  chap,  xiii  ver.  1.  where  it  is  said,  '•  Saul  reigned  one 
year;  and  when  he  had  reigned  two  years  over  Israel,  Saul  chose  him  three  thousand 
men,"  &c.  The  first  part  of  the  verse,  that  Saul  reigned  one  year,  has  no  sense  since 
it  does  not  tell  us  what  Saul  did,  nor  say  anything  of  what  happened  at  the  end  of  that 
one  year ;  and  it  is,  besides,  mere  absurdity  to  say  he  reigned  one  year,  when  the  very 
■ext  phrase  says  he  had  reigned  two ;  for  if  he  had  reigned  two,  it  was  impossible 
not  to  have  reigned  one. 

Another  instance  occurs  in  Joshua,  chap,  v,  where  the  writer  tells  us  a  story  of  nn 
angel  (for  such  the  table  of  contents  at  the  head  of  the  chanter  call?  him)  appearing 
«nto  Joshna;  and  the  story  ends  abruptly,  and  without  any  conclusion.    The  story  isa« 


Two  last  verses  of  Chronicles. 

Ver.  22.  Now  in  the  first  year 
of  Cyrus,  king  of  Persia,  that  the 
word  of  the  Lord,  spoken  by  the 
mouth  of  Jeremiah,  miglit  be  ac- 
complished, the  Lord  stirred  up 
the  spirit  of  Cyrus,  king  of  Per- 
sia, that  he  made  a  proclamation 
throughout  all  his  kingdom,  and 
put  it  also  in  writing,  saying, 

23.  Thus  saith  Cyrus,  king  of 
Persia,  All  the  kingdoms  of  the 
earth  hath  the  Lord  God  of 
heaven  given  me :  and  he  hath 
charged  me  to  build  him  an 
house  in  Jerusalem,  which  is  in 
Judah.  Who  is  there  among 
you  of  all  his  people  ?  the  Lord 
his  God  be  with  him,  and  let 
him  go  up. 


AGE  OF  REASON.  Ill 

the  Babylonian  captivity,  about  536  years  before  ChrisL 
Ezra  (who,  according  to  the  Jewish  commentators,  is  the 
same  person  as  is  called  Esdras  in  the  Apocrypha),  was 
one  of  the  persons  who  returned,  and  who,  it  is  probable, 
wrote  the  account  of  that  affair.  Nehemiah,  whose  book 
follows  next  to  Ezra,  was  another  of  the  returned  per- 
sons ;  and  who,  it  is  also  probable,  wrote  the  account  of 
the  same  affair  in  the  book  that  bears  his  name.  But 
these  accounts  are  nothing  to  us,  nor  to  any  other  per- 
sons, unless  it  be  to  the  Jews,  as  a  part  of  the  history  of 
their  nation  ;  and  there  is  just  as  much  of  the  word  of 
God  in  those  books  as  there  is  in  any  of  the  histories  of 
France,  or  Rapin's  History  of  England^  or  the  history  of 
any  other  country. 

But  even  in  matters  of  historical  record,  neither  of 
those  writers  are  to  be  depended  upon.  In  the  second 
chapter  of  Ezra,  the  writer  g^ves  a  list  of  the  tribes  and 
families,  and  of  the  precise  number  of  souls  of  each,  that 
returned  from  Babylon  to  Jerusalem  :  and  this  enrol- 
ment of  the  persons  so  returned  appears  to  have  been 
one  of  the  principal  objects  for  writing  the  book  ;  but 

follows:  Verse  13,  "  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  Joshua  was  by  Jericlio,  that  he  lifted  up 
bis  eyes  and  looked,  and  behold  there  stood  a  man  over  against  him  with  his  sword 
drawn  in  his  hand  ;  and  Joshua  went  unto  him  and  said  unto  him.  Art  thou  for  us  or 
for  our  adversaries?"  Verse  14.  'And  he  said  Nay  ;  but  as  captain  of  the  hosts  of 
the  Lord  am  I  now  come.  And  Joshua  fell  on  his  face  to  the  earth,  and  did  worship, 
and  said  unto  him.  What  saith  my  Lord  unto  his  servant  ?  "  Verse  15,  "  And  the  cap- 
tain of  the  Lord  s  host  said  unto  Joshua.  Loose  thy  shoe  from  off  thy  foot :  for  the  place 
whereon  thou  standcth  is  holy.  And  Joshua  did  so."  And  what  then  ?  uoihing,  for 
here  the  story  ends,  and  the  chapter  too. 

Either  the  story  is  broken  off  in  the  middle,  or  it  is  a  story  told  by  some  Jewish 
humorist,  in  ridicule  of  Joshua's  pretended  mission  from  Cod  ;  and  the  c<  mpilers  of 
the  Bible,  not  perceiving  the  design  of  the  story,  have  told  it  as  a  serious  matter.  As 
a  story  of  humor  and  ridicule  it  has  a  great  deal  of  point,  for  it  pompously  introduces 
an  angel  In  the  figure  of  a  man.  with  a  drawn  sword  in  bis  hand,  before  whom  Joshua 
falls  on  his  face  to  the  earth  and  worshios  (which  is  contrary  to  their  second  command- 
ment);  and  then  this  most  important  embnssy  from  heaven  ends  in  telling  Jobhua  to 
pull  off  his  shoe.     It  might  as  well  have  told  htm  to  pull  ui»  his  breeches. 

It  is  certain  however,  that  the  Jews  did  not  credit  everything  their  leaders  told 
them,  as  ani>ears  from  the  cavalier  manner  in  which  they  speak  of  Moses,  when  he  was 
gone  into  the  mnnnt.  "  As  for  this  Moset,"  say  they,  "  we  wot  not  what  ia  beooma  <d 
him."    Exod.  chap,  sucii,  ver.  i. 


112 


AGE   OF   REASON. 


in  this  there  is  an  error  that  destroys  the  intention  of  the 
undertaking. 

The  writer  begins  his  enrolment  in  the  following  man- 
ner, chap,  ii.,  ver.  3  :  "The  children  of  Parosh,  two 
thousand  a  hundred  seventy  and  two.**'  Ver.  4,  "The 
children  of  Shephatiah,  three  hundred  seventy  and  two. " 
And  in  this  manner  he  proceeds  through  all  the  families  ; 
and  in  the  64th  verse,  he  makes  a  total,  and  says,  "  The 
whole  congregation  together  vfas  forty  and  two  thousand 
three  hundred  and  threescore. ' ' 

But  whoever  will  take  the  trouble  of  casting  up  the 
several  particulars  will  find  that  the  total  is  but  29,818  ; 
so  that  the  error  is  12,542.*  What  certainty,  then,  can 
there  be  in  the  Bible  for  anything  ? 

Nehemiah,  in  like  manner,  g^ves  a  list  of  the  returned 
families,  and  of  the  number  of  each  family.  He  begins, 
as  in  Ezra,  by  saying,  chap.  vii. ,  ver.  8,  ' '  The  children 
of  Parosh,  two  thousand  a  hundred  seventy  and  two  ;  and 
so  on  through  all  the  families.  The  list  differs  in  several 
of  the  particulars  from  that  of  Ezra.  In  the  66th  verse, 
Nehemiah  makes  a  total,  and  says,  as  Ezra  had  said,  * '  The 
whole  congregation  together  was  forty  and  two  thousand 
three  hundred  and  threescore. ' '  But  the  particulars  of 
this  list  makes  a  total  of  but  31,089,  so  that  the  error  here 
is  11,271.  These  writers  may  do  well  enough  for  Bible- 
makers,  but  not  for  anything  where  truth  and  exactness 
is  necessary. 

*  Particulars  of  the  Families  from  the  second  Chapter  of  Ezra 


Chap.  ii. 

Bro't  for. 

12.243 

Bro't  for. 

15.953 
743 

Bro't  for. 

24.144 

Verse  3 

2172 

Verse  14 

2056 

Verse  25 

Verse  36 

973 

4 

372 

15 

454 

26 

621 

37 

1052 

5 

V^ 

16 

98 

27 

122 

38 

1247 

6 

2812 

'2 

323 

28 

223 

39 

1017 

7 

1254 

18 

113 

29 

52 

40 

74 

8 

945 

19 

223 

30 

156 

41 

12S 

9 

760 

20 

95 

3' 

1254 

42 

139 

10 

642 

21 

123 

32 

320 

53 

392 

II 

623 

22 

5f 

33 

725 

60 

652 

IS 

1222 

*3 

128 

34 

345 

»3 

666 

la.243 

24 

42 
J5-953 

35 

3630 
2,4144 

Total, 

29,818 

AGE   OF   REASON.  II3 

The  next  book  in  course  is  the  book  of  Esther.  If 
Madame  Esther  thought  it  any  honor  to  offer  herself 
as  a  kept  mistress  to  Ahasuerus,  or  as  a  rival  to  Queen 
Vashti,  who  had  refused  to  come  to  a  drunken  king  in 
the  midst  of  a  drunken  company,  to  be  made  a  show  of, 
(for  the  account  says  they  had  been  drinking  seven  days 
and  were  merry),  let  Esther  and  Mordecai  look  to  that; 
it  is  no  business  of  ours;  at  least  it  is  none  of  mine;  be- 
sides which  the  story  has  a  great  deal  the  appearance  of 
being  fabulous,  and  is  also  anonymous.  I  pass  on  to 
the  book  of  Job. 

The  book  of  Job  differs  in  character  from  all  the  books 
we  have  hitherto  passed  over.  Treachery  and  murder 
make  no  part  of  this  book  ;  it  is  the  meditations  of  a 
mind  strongly  impressed  with  the  vicissitudes  of  human 
life,  and  by  turns  sinking  under,  and  struggling  against 
the  pressure.  It  is  a  highly-wrought  composition,  be- 
tween willing  submission  and  involuntary  discontent, 
and  shows  man,  as  he  sometimes  is,  more  disposed  to  be 
resigned  than  he  is  capable  of  being.  Patience  has  but 
a  small  share  in  the  character  of  the  person  of  whom  the 
book  treats  ;  on  the  contrary,  his  grief  is  often  impetu- 
ous, but  he  still  endeavors  to  keep  a  guard  upon  it,  and 
seems  determined  in  the  midst  of  accumulating  ills,  to 
impose  upon  himself  the  hard  duty  of  contentment. 

I  have  spoken  in  a  respectful  manner  of  the  book  of 
Job  in  the  former  part  of  the  Age  of  Reason^  but  without 
knowing  at  that  time  what  I  have  learned  since,  which 
is,  that  from  all  the  evidence  that  can  be  collected  the 
book  of  Job  does  not  belong  to  the  Bible. 

I  have  seen  the  opinion  of  two  Hebrew  commentators, 
Abenezra  and  Spinoza,  upon  this  subject.  They  both  say 
that  the  book  of  Job  carries  no  internal  evidence  of  being 
a  Hebrew  book  ;  that  the  genius  of  the  composition  and 
the  drama  of  the  piece  are  not  Hebrew  ;  that  it  has  been 
translated  from  another  language  into  Hebrew,  and  that 


114  ^^^   ^^   REASON. 

the  author  of  the  book  was  a  Gentile  ;  that  the  character 
represented  under  the  name  of  Satan  (which  is  the  first 
and  only  time  this  name  is  mentioned  in  the  Bible)  does 
not  correspond  to  any  Hebrew  idea,  and  that  the  two  con- 
vocations which  the  Deity  is  supposed  to  have  made  of 
those  whom  the  poem  calls  sons  of  God,  and  the  famil- 
iarity which  this  supposed  Satan  is  stated  to  have  with 
the  Deit}',  are  in  the  same  case. 

It  may  also  be  observed,  that  the  book  shows  itself  to 
be  the  production  of  a  mind  cultivated  in  science,  which 
the  Jews,  so  far  from  beinpf  famous  for,  were  very  ignorant 
of.  The  allusions  to  objects  of  natural  philosophy  are 
frequent  and  strong,  and  are  of  a  different  cast  to  any- 
thing in  the  books  known  to  be  Hebrew.  The  astro- 
nomical names,  Pleiades,  Orion,  and  Arcturus,  are  Greek 
and  not  Hebrew  names,  and  it  does  not  appear  from  any- 
thing that  is  to  be  found  in  the  Bible,  that  the  Jews 
knew  anything  of  astronomy  or  that  they  studied  it; 
they  had  no  translation  of  those  names  into  their  own 
language,  but  adopted  the  names  as  they  found  them  in 
the  poem. 

That  the  Jews  did  translate  the  literary  productions  of 
the  Gentile  nations  into  the  Hebrew  language,  and  mix 
them  with  their  own,  is  not  a  matter  of  doubt ;  the  thirty- 
first  chapter  of  Proverbs  is  an  evidence  of  this  ;  it  is  there 
said,  V.  I  :  "  T^e  words  of  King  Lemuel^  the  prophecy  that 
his  mother  taught  him. ' '  This  verse  stands  as  a  preface  to 
the  Proverbs  that  follow,  and  which  are  not  the  proverbs 
of  Solomon,  but  of  Lemuel ;  and  this  Lemuel  was  not 
one  of  the  kings  of  Israel,  nor  of  Judah,  but  of  some  other 
country,  and  consequently  a  Gentile.  The  Jews,  how- 
ever, have  adopted  his  proverbs,  and  as  they  cannot  give 
any  account  who  the  author  of  the  book  of  Job  was,  nor 
how  they  came  by  the  book,  and  as  it  differs  in  character 
from  the  Hebrew  writings,  and  stands  totally  unconnected 
with  even,'  other  book  and  chapter  in  the  Bible,  before 


AGE  OF    REASON.  II5 

it  and  after  it,  it  has  all  the  circumstantial  evidence  of 
being  originally  a  book  of  the  Gentiles.  * 

The  Bible-makers  and  those  regulators  of  time,  the 
chronologists,  appear  to  have  been  at  a  loss  where  to 
place  and  how  to  dispose  of  the  book  of  Job  ;  for  it  con- 
tains no  one  historical  circumstance,  nor  allusion  to  any, 
that  might  determine  its  place  in  the  Bible.  But  it 
would  not  have  answered  the  purpose  of  these  men  to 
have  informed  the  world  of  their  ignorance,  and  there- 
fore, they  have  affixed  it  to  the  era  of  1520  years  before 
Christ,  which  is  during  the  time  the  Israelites  were  in 
Egypt,  and  for  which  they  have  just  as  much  authority 
and  no  more  than  I  should  have  for  saying  it  was  a 
thousand  years  before  that  period.  The  probability,  how- 
ever, is  that  it  is  older  than  any  book  in  the  Bible  ;  and 
it  is  the  only  one  that  can  be  read  without  indignation 
or  disgust. 

We  know  nothing  of  what  the  ancient  Gentile  world 
(as  it  is  called)  was  before  the  time  of  the  Jews,  whose 
practise  has  been  to  calumniate  and  blacken  the  character 
of  all  other  nations  ;  and  it  is  from  the  Jewish  accounts 
that  we  have  learned  to  call  them  heathens.  But,  as  far 
as  we  know  to  the  contrary,  they  were  a  just  and  moral 
people,  and  not  addicted,  like  the  Jews,  to  cruelty  and 
revenge,  but  of  whose  profession  of  faith  we  are  unac- 
quainted.    It  appears  to  have  been  their  custom  to  per- 

•  The  prayer  known  by  the  name  of  Atr*""s  prayer,  in  the  30th  chapter  of  Proverbs, 
immediately  preceding:  the  proverbs  of  Lemuel,  and  which  is  the  only  sensible,  well- 
conceived  and  well-expressed  prayer  in  the  Bible,  has  much  the  appearance  of  beine:  a 
prayer  taken  from  the  Gentiles.  The  name  of  Agur  occurs  on  no  other  occasion  than 
(his;  and  he  is  iniroduced.  together  with  the  prayer  ascribed  to  him,  in  the  same  man- 
ner, and  nearly  in  the  same  words,  thai  Lemuel  and  his  proverbs  are  introduced  in  the 
chapter  that  follows.  The  first  verse  of  the  30th  chapter  says.  "  The  words  of  ARur, 
the  so'i  of  Jakfh.  even  the  prophecy  "  Here  the  word  prophecy  is  used  in  the  same 
application  it  has  in  the  following  chapter  of  Lemuel  unconnected  with  any  thing  of 
prediction  The  prayer  of  Agur  is  in  the  8th  and  9th  verses.  "  Remove  far  from  me 
vanity  and  lies  :  give  me  neither  poverty  nor  riches;  feed  me  with  food  convenient  for 
me :  l-st  I  be  full  and  deny  thee,  and  sav.  Who  is  the  Lord  ?  or  lest  I  be  poor  and  steal, 
and  take  the  name  of  mv  God  in  vain."  This  has  not  any  of  the  marks  of  being  a 
Jewish  praver,  fnr  the  Jews  never  praved  hut  when  they  were  in  trouble,  ud  acvcr  for 
•a)-tluog  but  victory,  vengeance  and  riches. 


Il6  AGE  OF   REASON. 

sonify  both  virtue  and  vice  by  statues  and  images,  as  is 
done  nowadays  both  by  statuary  and  by  painting  ;  but 
it  does  not  follow  from  this  that  they  worshiped  them, 
any  more  than  we  do. 

I  pass  on  to  the  book  of  Psalms^  of  which  it  is  not 
necessary  to  make  much  observation.  Some  of  them 
are  moral,  and  others  are  very  revengeful  ;  and  the 
greater  part  relates  to  certain  local  circumstances  of 
the  Jewish  nation  at  the  time  they  were  written,  with 
which  we  have  nothing  to  do.  It  is,  however,  an 
error  or  an  imposition  to  call  them  the  Psalms  of 
David.  They  are  a  collection,  as  song-books  are  nowa- 
days, from  diiferent  song-writers,  who  lived  at  different 
times.  Th2  137th  Psalm  could  not  have  been  written  till 
more  than  400  years  after  the  time  of  David,  because  it 
was  written  in  commemoration  of  an  event,  the  captivity 
of  the  Jews  in  Babylon,  which  did  not  happen  till  that 
distance  of  time.  ''''By  the  rivers  of  Babylon  we  sat 
down ;  yea^  zve  wept^  when  we  remembered  Zion.  We 
hanged  our  harps  upon  the  willows^  in  the  midst  thereof ; 
for  there  they  that  carried  us  away  captive  required 
of  us  a  songy  sayings  Sing  us  one  of  the  songs  of  Zion.'''' 
As  a  man  would  say  to  an  American,  or  to  a  Frenchman, 
or  to  an  Englishman,  ''Sing  us  one  of  your  American 
songs,  or  of  your  French  songs,  or  ofyour  English  songs." 
This  remark,  with  respect  to  the  time  this  Psalm  was 
written,  is  of  no  other  use  than  to  show  (among  others 
already  mentioned)  the  general  imposition  the  world  has 
been  under  in  respect  to  the  authors  of  the  Bible.  No  re- 
gard has  been  paid  to  time,  place  and  circumstance,  and 
the  names  of  persons  have  been  affixed  to  the  several 
books,  which  it  was  as  impossible  they  should  write  as 
that  a  man  should  walk  in  procession  at  his  own  funeral. 

The  Book  of  Proverbs.  These,  like  the  Psalms,  are  a 
collection,  and  that  from  authors  belonging  to  other  na- 
tions than  those  of  the  Jewish  nation,  as  I  have  shown  in 


AGE   OF   REASON.  I17 

the  observations  upon  the  book  of  Job  ;  besides  which 
some  of  the  proverbs  ascribed  to  Solomon  did  not  appear 
till  two  hundred  and  fifty  years  after  the  death  of  Solo- 
mon ;  for  it  is  said  in  the  ist  verse  of  the  25th  chapter, 
"*'  These  are  also  proverbs  of  Solomon^  which  the  men  0/ 
Hezekiah^  king  ofjudah^  copied  out.''  It  was  two  hun- 
dred and  fifty  years  from  the  time  of  Solomon  to  the  time 
of  Hezekiah.  When  a  man  is  famous  and  his  name  is 
abroad,  he  is  made  the  putative  father  of  things  he  never 
said  or  did,  and  this,  most  probably,  has  been  the  case 
with  Solomon.  It  appears  to  have  been  the  fashion  of 
that  day  to  make  proverbs,  as  it  is  now  to  make  jest- 
books  and  ff*  ther  them  upon  those  who  never  saw  them. 

The  book  of  Ecclesiastes^  or  the  Preacher^  is  also  as- 
cribed to  Solomon,  and  that  with  much  reason,  if  not 
with  truth.  It  is  written  as  the  solitary  reflections  of  a 
worn-out  debauchee,  such  as  Solomon  was,  who,  looking 
back  on  scenes  he  can  no  longer  enjoy,  cries  out,  ''''All 
is  vanity  P"*  A  great  deal  of  the  metaphor  and  of  the 
sentiment  is  obscure,  most  probably  by  translation  ;  but 
enough  is  left  to  show  they  were  strongly  pointed  in  the 
original.*  From  what  is  transmitted  to  us  of  the  char- 
acter of  Solomon,  he  was  witty,  ostentatious,  dissolute, 
and  at  last  melancholy.  He  lived  fast,  and  died,  tired  of 
the  world,  at  the  age  of  fifty-eight  years. 

Seven  hundred  wives  and  three  hundred  concubines 
are  worse  than  none,  and,  however  it  may  carr}'  with  it 
the  appearance  of  heightened  enjoyment,  it  defeats  all  the 
felicity  of  affection  by  leaving  it  no  point  to  fix  upon. 
Divided  love  is  never  happy.  This  was  the  case  with 
Solomon,  and  if  he  could  not,  with  all  his  pretentions  to 
wisdom,  discover  it  beforehand,  he  merited,  unpitied, 
the  mortification  he  afterward  endured.  In  this  point  of 
view,  his  preaching  is  unnecessary,  because,  to  know  the 

*  Those  that  look  out  of  the  window  shall  be  darkened,  is  an  obscure  figure  in  tnuM- 
-Ifttion  fur  loss  of  sig^ht. 


Il8  AGE  OF   REASON. 

consequences,  it  is  only  necessary  to  know  the  cause. 
Seven  hundred  wives,  and  three  hundred  concubines 
would  have  stood  in  place  of  the  whole  book.  It  was 
needless,  after  this,  to  say  that  all  was  vanity  and  vexa- 
tion of  spirit ;  for  it  is  impossible  to  derive  happiness 
from  the  company  of  those  whom  we  deprive  of  hap- 
piness. 

To  be  happy  in  old  age,  it  is  necessary  that  we  ac- 
custom ourselves  to  objects  that  can  accompany  the  mind 
all  the  way  through  life,  and  that  we  take  the  rest  as  good 
in  their  day.  The  mere  man  of  pleasure  is  miserable  in 
old  age,  and  the  mere  drudge  in  business  is  but  little 
better ;  whereas,  natural  philosophy,  mathematical  and 
mechanical  science,  are  a  continual  source  of  tranquil 
pleasure,  and  in  spite  of  the  gloomy  dogmas  of  priests 
and  of  superstition,  the  study  of  these  things  is  the  true 
theology  ;  it  teaches  man  to  know  and  to  admire  the 
Creator,  for  the  principles  of  science  are  in  the  creation, 
and  are  unchangeable  and  of  divine  origin. 

Those  who  knew  Benjamin  Franklin  will  recollect 
that  his  mind  was  ever  young,  his  temper  ever  serene  ; 
science,  that  never  grows  gray,  was  always  his  mistress. 
He  was  never  without  an  object,  for  when  we  cease  to 
have  an  object,  we  become  like  an  invalid  in  a  hospital 
waiting  for  death. 

Solomon's  Songs  are  amorous  and  foolish  enough,  but 
which  wrinkled  fanaticism  has  called  divine.  The  com- 
pilers of  the  Bible  have  placed  these  songs  after  the  book 
of  Ecclesiastes,  and  the  chronologists  have  affixed  to 
them  the  era  of  1014  years  before  Christ,  at  which  time 
Solomon,  according  to  the  same  chronology,  was  nine- 
teen years  of  age,  and  was  then  forming  his  seraglio  of 
wives  and  concubines.  The  Bible-makers  and  the 
chronologists  should  have  managed  this  matter  i  little 
better,  and  either  have  said  nothing  about  the  time,  or 
chosen  a  time  less  inconsistent  with  the  supposed  divinity 


AGE  OF,  REASON.  II9 

of  those  songs  ;  for  Solomon  was  then  in  the  honeymoon 
of  one  thousand  debaucheries. 

It  should  also  have  occurred  to  them  that,  as  he  wrote, 
if  he  did  write,  the  book  of  Ecclesiastes  long  after  these 
songs,  and  in  which  he  exclaims,  that  all  is  vanity  and 
vexation  of  spirit,  that  he  included  those  songs  in  that 
description.  This  is  the  more  probable,  because  he  says, 
or  somebody  for  him,  Ecclesiastes,  chap.  ii.  ver.  8,  "/ 
gat  me  men  singers  and  women  singers  (most  probably 
to  sing  those  songs),  as  musical  instruments  and  that  of  all 
sorts ;  and  behold,  (ver.  ii),  all  was  vanity  and  vexation 
of  spirit. "  The  compilers,  however,  have  done  their  work 
but  by  halves,  for  as  they  have  given  us  the  songs,  they 
should  have  given  us  the  tunes,  that  we  might  sing  them. 

The  books  called  the  Books  of  the  Prophets  fill  up  all 
the  remaining  parts  of  the  Bible  ;  they  are  sixteen  in 
number,  beginning  with  Isaiah,  and  ending  with  Mala- 
chi,  of  which  I  have  given  you  a  list  in  my  observations 
upon  Chronicles.  Of  these  sixteen  prophets,  all  of  whom, 
except  the  three  last,  lived  within  the  time  the  books  of 
Kings  and  Chronicles  were  writen,  two  only,  Isaiah  and 
Jeremiah,  are  mentioned  in  the  history  of  those  books. 
I  shall  begin  with  those  two,  reserving  what  I  have  to 
say  on  the  general  character  of  the  men  called  prophets 
to  another  part  of  the  work. 

Whoever  will  take  the  trouble  of  reading  the  book  as- 
cribed to  Isaiah  will  find  it  one  of  the  most  wild  and  dis- 
orderly compositions  ever  put  together  ;  it  has  neither 
beginning,  middle,  nor  end  ;  and,  except  a  short  histori- 
cal part  and  a  few  sketches  of  history  in  two  or  three  of 
the  first  chapters,  is  one  continued,  incoherent,  bombas- 
tical  rant,  full  of  extravagant  metaphor,  without  appli- 
cation, and  destitute  of  meaning ;  a  school-boy  would 
scarcely  have  been  excusable  for  writing  such  stuflf ;  it 
is  (at  least  in  the  translation)  that  kind  of  composi- 
tion and  false  taste  that  is  properly  called  prose  run  mad. 


I30  AGE   OF    REASON. 

The  historical  part  begins  at  the  36th  chapter,  and  is 
continued  to  the  end  of  the  39th  chapter.  It  relates  to 
some  matters  that  are  said  to  have  passed  during  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah,  king  of  Judah  ;  at  which  time  Isaiah 
lived.  This  fragment  of  history  begins  and  ends  abruptly  ; 
it  has  not  the  least  connection  with  the  chapter  that  pre- 
cedes it,  nor  with  that  which  follows  it,  nor  with  any 
other  in  the  book.  It  is  probable  that  Isaiah  wrote  this 
fragment  himself,  because  he  was  an  actor  in  the  circum- 
stances it  treats  of;  but,  except  this  part,  there  are 
scarcely  two  chapters  that  have  any  connection  with  each 
other  ;  one  is  entitled,  at  the  beginning  of  the  first  verse, 
"The  burden  of  Babylon;"  another, "The  burden  of 
Moab  ;  "  another  "  The  burden  of  Damascus  ;  "  another, 
"The  burden  of  Egypt ;  "  another,  "  The  burden  of  the 
desert  of  the  sea  ; ' '  another,  ' '  The  burden  of  the  valley 
of  vision  "  *  —  as  you  would  say,  ' '  The  story  of  the 
Knight  of  the  Burning  Mountain, "  "The  story  of  Cin- 
derella," or  "The  Children  in  the  Wood, "  etc.,  etc. 

I  have  already  shown,  in  the  instance  of  the  two  last 
verses  of  Chronicles,  and  the  three  first  in  Ezra,  that 
the  compilers  of  the  Bible  mixed  and  confounded  the 
writings  of  different  authors  with  each  other,  which  alone, 
were  there  no  other  cause,  is  sufficient  to  destroy  the 
authenticity  of  any  compilation,  because  it  is  more  than 
presumptive  evidence  that  the  compilers  were  ignorant 
who  the  authors  were.  A  very  glaring  instance  of  this 
occurs  in  the  book  ascribed  to  Isaiah  ;  the  latter  part  of 
the  44th  chapter  and  the  beginning  of  the  45th,  so  far 
from  having  been  written  by  Isaiah,  could  only  have  been 
written  by  some  person  who  lived  at  least  a  hundred  and 
fifty  years  after  Isaiah  was  dead. 

These  chapters  are  a  compliment  to  Cyrus,  who  per- 
mitted the  Jews  to  return  to  Jerusalem,  from  the  Baby- 
lonian captivity,  to  rebuild  Jerusalem  and  the  temple,  as 

*Se«  beginning  of  chapters  xiii,  xv,  xvii.  xix,  xzi  and  zzii, 


AGE  OF  REASON.  121 

is  Stated  in  Ezra.  The  last  verse  of  the  44th  chapter  and 
the  beginning  of  the  45th,  are  in  the  following  words  : 
"  That  saith  of  Cyrus ;  He  is  7ny  shepherd^  and  shall 
perform  all  my  pleasure ;  even  saying  to  ferusalem^ 
Thou  shall  be  built^  and  to  the  temple^  Thy  foundation 
shall  be  laid.  Thus  saith  the  Lord  to  his  anointed^  to 
Cyrus^  whose  right  hand  I  have  holden^  to  subdue  nations 
before  him  ;  and  I  will  loose  the  loins  ofkings^  to  open  be- 
fore him  the  two-leaved  gates  and  the  gates  shall  not  be 
shut;  I  will  go  before  thee^'''' ^\.Q. 

What  audacity  of  church  and  priestly  ignorance  it  is 
to  impose  this  book  upon  the  world  as  the  writing  of 
Isaiah,  when  Isaiah,  according  to  their  own  chronology, 
died  soon  after  the  death  of  Hezekiah,  which  was  693 
years  before  Christ,  and  the  decree  of  Cyrus,  in  favor  of 
the  Jews  returning  to  Jerusalem,  was,  according  to  the 
same  chronology,  536  years  before  Christ,  which  is  a 
distance  of  time  between  the  two  of  162  years.  I  do  not 
suppose  that  the  compilers  of  the  Bible  made  these 
books,  but  rather  that  they  picked  up  some  loose  anony- 
mous essays,  and  put  them  together  under  the  names  of 
such  authors  as  best  suited  their  purpose.  They  have 
encouraged  the  imposition,  which  is  next  to  inventing 
it,  for  it  was  impossible  but  they  must  have  observed  it. 

When  we  see  the  studied  craft  of  the  Scripture-makers, 
in  making  every  part  of  this  romantic  book  of  school- 
boy's eloquence  bend  to  the  monstrous  idea  of  a  Son  of 
God  begotten  by  a  ghost  on  the  body  of  a  virgin,  there 
is  no  imposition  we  are  not  justified  in  suspecting  them 
of.  Every  phrase  and  circumstance  is  marked  with 
the  barbarous  hand  of  superstitious  torture,  and  forced 
into  meanings  it  was  impossible  they  could  have.  The 
head  of  every  chapter  and  the  top  of  every  page  are 
blazoned  with  the  names  of  Christ  and  the  Church,  that 
the  unwary  reader  might  suck  in  the  error  before  he 
began  to  read. 


122  AGE   C<K   KHASON. 

"  Behold  a  virgin  shall  conceive^  a7id  bear  a  son^''  Isaiah, 
chap.  vii.  ver.  14,  has  been  interpreted  to  mean  the  per- 
son called  Jesus  Christ,  and  his  mother  Mary,  and  has 
been  echoed  through  Christendom  for  more  than  a  thou- 
sand years ;  and  such  has  been  the  rage  of  this  opinion 
that  scarcely  a  spot  in  it  but  has  been  stained  with  bloody 
and  marked  with  desolation  in  consequence  of  it.  Though 
it  is  not  my  intention  to  enter  into  controversy  on  sub- 
jects of  this  kind,  but  to  confine  myself  to  show  that  the 
Bible  is  spurious,  and  thus,  by  taking  away  the  founda- 
tion, to  overthrow  at  once  the  whole  structure  of  super- 
stition raised  thereon,  I  will,  however,  stop  a  moment 
to  expose  the  fallacious  application  of  this  passage. 

Whether  Isaiah  was  playing  a  trick  with  Ahaz,  king 
of  Judah,  to  whom  this  passage  is  spoken,  is  no  business  of 
mine  ;  I  mean  only  to  show  the  misapplication  of  the  pas- 
sage, and  that  it  has  no  more  reference  to  Christ  and  his 
mother  than  it  has  to  mje  and  my  mother.  The  story  is 
simply  this  :  The  king  of  Syria  and  the  king  of  Israel,  (I 
have  already  mentioned  that  the  Jews  were  split  into  two 
nations,  one  of  which  was  called  Judah,  the  capital  of 
which  was  Jerusalem,  and  the  other  Israel),  made  war 
jointly  against  Ahaz,  king  of  Judah,  and  marched  their 
armies  toward  Jerusalem.  Ahaz  and  his  people  became 
alarmed,  and  the  account  says,  verse  2,  ''''And  his  heart 
was  moved^  and  the  heart  of  his  people^  as  the  trees  of  the 
7vood  are  moved  with  the  wind.'*'' 

In  this  situation  of  things,  Isaiah  addresses  himself  to 
Ahaz,  and  assures  him  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  (the  cant 
phrase  of  all  the  prophets)  that  these  two  kings  should 
not  succeed  against  him  ;  and  to  satisfy  Ahaz  that  this 
should  be  the  case,  tells  him  to  ask  a  sign.  This,  the  ac- 
count says,  Ahaz  declined  doing,  giving  as  a  reason  that 
he  would  not  tempt  the  Lord  ;  upon  which  Isaiah,  who 
is  the  speaker,  says,  ver.  14,  "Therefore  the  Lord  him- 
self shall  give  you  a  sign,  Behold^  a  virgin  shall  conceive 


AGB  OP   REASON.  123 

and  bear  a  son  ;'*'*  and  the  i6th  verse  says,  ''''For  before 
this  child  shall  know  to  refuse  tJie  evil^  and  choose  the 
^oody  the  land  that  thou  abhorrest,  (or  dreadest,  mean- 
ing Syria  and  the  kingdom  of  Israel)  shall  be  forsaken 
of  both  her  kings. "  Here  then  was  the  sig^,  and  the 
time  limited  for  the  completion  of  the  assurance  or 
promise,  namely,  before  this  child  should  know  to  re- 
fuse the  evil  and  choose  the  good. 

Isaiah  having  committed  himself  thus  far,  it  became 
necessary  to  him,  in  order  to  avoid  the  imputation  of 
being  a  false  prophet  and  the  consequence  thereof,  to 
take  measures  to  make  this  sign  appear.  It  certainly 
was  not  a  diflficult  thing,  in  any  time  of  the  world,  to  find 
a  girl  with  child,  or  to  make  her  so,  and  perhaps  Isaiah 
knew  of  one  beforehand  ;  for  I  do  not  suppose  that  the 
prophets  of  that  day  were  any  more  to  be  trusted  than 
the  priests  of  this.  Be  that,  however,  as  it  may,  he  says 
in  the  next  chapter,  ver.  2,  "And  I  took  unto  me  faith- 
ful witnesses  to  record,  Uriah  the  priest,  and  Zechariah 
the  sonof  Jeberechiah,  and  /  went  unto  the  prophetess^ 
and  she  conceived  and  bare  a  son. ' ' 

Here,  then,  is  the  whole  story,  foolish  as  it  is,  of  this 
child  and  this  virgin  ;  and  it  is  upon  the  barefaced  per- 
version of  this  story,  that  the  book  of  Matthew,  and  the 
impudence  and  sordid  interests  of  priests  in  later  times, 
have  founded  a  theory  which  they  call  the  Gospel ;  and 
have  applied  this  story  to  signify  the  person  they  call 
Jesus  Christ,  begotten,  they  say,  by  a  ghost,  whom  they 
call  holy,  on  the  body  of  a  woman,  engaged  in  marriage, 
and  afterward  married,  whom  they  call  a  virgin,  700 
years  after  this  foolish  story  was  told  ;  a  theory  which, 
speaking  for  myself,  I  hesitate  not  tq  disbelieve,  and  to 
say,  is  as  fabulous  and  as  false  as  God  is  true.  * 

*In  the  14th  verse  of  the  7th  chapter,  it  is  said  that  the  child  should  be  called  Ira- 
manuel ;  but  this  name  was  not  g^iven  to  either  of  the  children  otherwise  than  as  a 
character  which  the  word  signifies.  That  of  the  prophetess  was  called  Malicr-shalal- 
hafsb-baz,  and  that  of  Mary  was  called  Jesus. 


134  ^^^  ^^   REASON. 

But  to  show  the  imposition  and  falsehood  of  Isaiah,  we 
have  only  to  attend  to  the  sequel  of  this  story,  which, 
though  it  is  passed  over  in  silence  in  the  book  of  Isaiah, 
is  related  in  the  28th  chapter  of  the  second  Chronicles, 
and  which  is,  that  instead  of  these  two  kings  failing  in 
their  attempt  against  Ahaz,  king  of  Judah,  as  Isaiah 
had  pretended  to  foretell  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  they 
succeeded  ;  Ahaz  was  defeated  and  destroyed,  a  hundred 
and  twenty  thousand  of  his  people  were  slaughtered, 
Jerusalem  was  plundered,  and  two  hundred  thousand 
women,  and  sons  and  daughters,  carried  into  captivity. 
Thus  much  for  this  lying  prophet  and  impostor,  Isaiah, 
and  the  book  of  falsehoods  that  bears  his  name. 

I  pass  on  to  the  book  of  Jeremiah.  This  prophet,  as 
he  is  called,  lived  in  the  time  that  Nebuchadnezzar  be- 
sieged Jerusalem,  in  the  reign  of  Zedekiah,  the  last  king 
of  Judah  ;  and  the  suspicion  was  strong  against  him  that 
he  was  a  traitor  in  the  interests  of  Nebuchadnezzar. 
Everything  relating  to  Jeremiah  shows  him  to  have  been 
a  man  of  an  equivocal  character  ;  in  his  metaphor  of  the 
potter  and  the  clay,  chap,  xviii. ,  he  guards  his  prognos- 
tications in  such  a  crafty  manner  as  always  to  leave  him- 
self a  door  to  escape  by,  in  case  the  event  should  be  con- 
trary to  what  he  had  predicted. 

In  the  7th  and  8th  verses  of  that  chapter  he  makes  the 
Almighty  to  say,  "  At  what  instant  I  shall  speak  con- 
cerning a  nation,  and  concerning  a  kingdom,  to  pluck  up, 
and  to  pull  down,  and  destroy  it.  If  that  nation,  against 
whom  I  have  pronounced,  turn  from  their  evil,  I  will  re- 
pent of  the  evil  that  I  thought  to  do  unto  them." 
Here  was  a  proviso  against  one  side  of  the  case  ;  now  for 
the  other  side. 

Verses  9  and  10,  ' '  And  at  what  instant  I  shall  speak  con- 
cerning a  nation,  and  concerning  a  kingdom,  to  build 
and  to  plant  it,  if  it  do  evil  in  my  sight,  that  it  obey  not 
my  voice  ;   then  I  shall   repent  of  the  good  wherewith 


AGE  OF   REASON.  1 25 

I  said  I  would  benefit  them."  Here  is  a  proviso  against 
the  other  side  ;  and,  according  to  this  plan  of  prophesying, 
a  prophet  could  never  be  wrong,  however  mistaken  the 
Almighty  might  be.  This  sort  of  absurd  subterfuge,  and 
this  manner  of  speaking  of  the  Almighty,  as  one  would 
speak  of  a  man,  is  consistent  with  nothing  but  the 
stupidity  of  the  Bible. 

As  to  the  authenticity  of  the  book,  it  is  only  necessary 
to  read  it,  in  order  to  decide  positively  that,  though  some 
passages  recorded  therein  may  have  been  spoken  by  Jere* 
miah,  he  is  not  the  author  of  the  book.  The  historical 
parts,  if  they  can  be  called  by  that  name,  are  in  the  most 
confused  condition  ;  the  same  events  are  several  times 
repeated,  and  that  in  a  manner  different,  and  sometimes 
in  contradiction  to  each  other ;  and  this  disorder  runs  even, 
to  the  last  chapter,  where  the  history  upon  which  the 
greater  part  of  the  book  has  been  employed  begins  anew, 
and  ends  abruptly.  The  book  has  all  the  appearance  of 
being  a  medley  of  unconnected  anecdotes  respecting  per- 
sons and  things  of  that  time,  collected  together  in  the 
same  rude  manner  as  if  the  various  and  contradictory  ac- 
counts that  are  to  be  found  in  a  bundle  of  newspapers 
respecting  persons  and  things  of  the  present  day,  were 
put  together  without  date,  order,  or  explanation.  I  will 
give  two  or  three  examples  of  this  kind. 

It  appears,  from  the  account  of  the  37th  chapter,  that 
the  army  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  which  is  called  the  army  of 
the  Chaldeans,  had  besieged  Jerusalem  some  time,  and 
on  their  hearing  that  the  army  of  Pharaoh,  of  Egypt,  was 
marching  against  them  they  raised  the  siege  and  retreated 
for  a  time.  It  may  here  be  proper  to  mention,  in  order 
to  understand  this  confused  history,  that  Nebuchad- 
nezzar had  besieged  and  taken  Jerusalem  during  the 
reign  of  Jehoiakim,  the  predecessor  of  Zedekiah  ;  and 
that  it  was  Nebuchadnezzar  who  had  made  Zedekiah 
king,  or  rather  viceroy  ;  and  that  this  second  sieg^,  of 


126  AGE  OP  REASON. 

which  the  book  of  Jeremiah  treats,  was  in  conseqnence 
of  the  revolt  of  Zedekiah  against  Nebuchadnezzar.  This 
will  in  some  measure  account  for  the  suspicion  that 
affixes  to  Jeremiah  of  being  a  traitor  and  in  the  interest 
of  Nebuchadnezzar  ;  whom  Jeremiah  calls,  in  the  43d 
chapter,  ver.  10,  the  servant  of  God. 

The  nth  verse  of  this  chapter  (the  37th),  says,  **  And 
it  came  to  pass,  that,  when  the  army  of  the  Chaldeans 
was  broken  up  from  Jerusalem,  for  fear  of  Pharoah's 
army,  that  Jeremiah  went  forth  out  of  Jerusalem,  to  go 
(as  this  account  states)  into  the  land  of  Benjamin,  to  sep- 
arate himself  thence  in  the  midst  of  the  people,  and 
when  he  was  in  the  gate  of  Benjamin,  a  captain  of  the 
ward  was  there,  whose  name  was  Irijah,  the  son  of 
Shelemiah,  the  son  of  Hananiah,  and  he  took  Jeremiah 
the  prophet,  saying.  Thou  fallest  away  to  the  Chaldeans. 
Then  said  Jeremiah,  It  is  false  ;  I  fall  not  away  to  the 
Chaldeans. ' '  Jeremiah  being  thus  stopped  and  accused, 
was,  after  being  examined,  committed  to  prison  on  sus- 
picion of  being  a  traitor,  where  he  remained,  as  is  stated 
in  the  last  verse  of  this  chapter. 

But  the  next  chapter  gives  an  account  of  the  imprison- 
ment of  Jeremiah  which  has  no  connection  with  this  ac- 
count, but  ascribes  his  imprisonment  to  another  circum- 
stance, and  for  which  we  must  go  back  to  the  21st  chapter. 
It  is  there  stated,  ver.  i,  that  Zedekiah  sent  Pashur,  the 
son  of  Malchiah,  and  Zephaniah,  the  son  of  Maaseiah  the 
priest,  to  Jeremiah  to  inquire  of  him  concerning  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, whose  army  was  then  before  Jerusalem  ;  and 
Jeremiah  said  unto  them,  ver.  8  and  9,  "Thus  saitli  the 
Lord,  Behold  I  set  before  you  the  way  of  life,  and  the 
way  of  death  ;  he  that  abideth  in  this  city  shall  die 
by  the  sword,  and  by  the  famine,  and  by  the  pestilence; 
but  he  that  goeth  out  and  falleth  to  the  Chaldeans  that 
hesiege  you,  he  shall  live,  and  his  life  shall  be  unto 
him  for  a  prey." 


AGE  OF    REASON.  12/ 

This  interview  and  conference  breaks  off  abniptly  at 
the  end  of  the  loth  verse  of  the  21st  chapter  ;  and  such 
is  the  disorder  of  this  book  that  we  have  to  pass  over  six- 
teen chapters,  upon  various  subjects,  in  order  to  come  at 
the  continuation  and  event  of  this  conference,  and  this 
brings  us  to  the  first  verse  of  the  38th  chapter,  as  I  have 
just  mentioned. 

The  38th  chapter  opens  with  saying,  "Then  Shepa- 
tiah,  the  son  of  Mattan  ;  Gedaliah,  the  son  of  Pashur  ; 
and  Jucil,  the  son  of  Shelemiah  ;  and  Pashur,  the  son 
of  Malchiah  (here  are  more  persons  mentioned  than  in  the 
2ist  chapter),  heard  the  words  tliat  Jeremiah  had  spoken 
unto  all  the  people,  saying.  Thus  saith  the  Lord^  He  that 
remaineth  in  this  city^  shall  die  by  the  sword^  by  the  famine^ 
and  by  the  pestilence  ;  but  he  that  goeth  forth  to  the  Chal- 
deans shall  live^  for  he  shall  have  his  life  for  a  prey ^  and 
shall  live ;'*'*  (which  are  the  words  of  the  conference), 
therefore,  (they  say  to  Zedekiah),  "We  beseech  thee,  let 
us  put  this  man  \.oA^2LCi\^  for  thus  he  weakeneth  the  hands 
of  the  men  of  war  that  remain  in  this  city^  and  the 
hands  of  all  the  people  in  speaking  such  words  unto  them  / 
for  this  man  seeketh  not  the  welfare  of  the  people^  but  the 
hurt. ' '  And  at  the  6th  verse  it  is  said,  *  *  Then  took  they 
Jeremiah,  and  cast  him  into  the  dungeon  of  Malchiah." 

These  two  accounts  are  different  and  contradictory. 
The  one  ascribes  his  imprisonment  to  his  attempt  to  es- 
cape out  of  the  city  :  the  other  to  his  preaching  and 
prophesying  in  the  city  ;  the  one  to  his  being  seized  by 
the  guard  at  the  gate  ;  the  other  to  his  being  accused  be- 
fore Zedekiah,  by  the  conferees.  * 

•I  observed  two  chapters.  i6th  and  17th,  in  the  first  book  of  Samuel,  that  contradict 
each  other  with  respect  to  David,  and  the  manner  he  became  acquainted  with  Saul ;  as 
the  37th  and  38th  chapters  of  the  book  of  Jeremiah  contradict  each  other  with  respect 
to  the  cause  of  Jeremiah's  imprisonment. 

fn  the  i6th  chapter  of  Samuel,  it  is  said,  that  an  evil  spirit  of  God  troubled  SanI,  and 
that  bis  servants  advised  him  (as  a  remedy)  "to  seek  out  a  man  who  was  a  cunning 
player  upon  the  haT)  "  And  Saul  said,  (verse  17.  )  Provide  me  now  a  man  that  can 
pliiy  w«ll,  and  brint'/u'mto  iti  •     rii-ii  ni-were-l  one  of  the  servants,  andtviid.  Behold 


128  AGB  OF   REASON. 

In  the  next  chapter  (the  39th)  we  have  another  instance 
of  the  disordered  state  of  this  book  ;  for  notwithstanding 
the  siege  of  the  city  by  Nebuchadnezzar  has  been  the 
subject  of  several  of  the  preceding  chapters,  particularly 
the  37th  and  38,  the  39th  chapter  begins  as  if  not  a  word 
had  been  said  upon  the  subject  ;  and  as  if  the  reader  was 
to  be  informed  of  ever}'  particular  concerning  it,  for  it 
begins  with  saying,  verse  i,  "In  the  ninth  year  of 
Zedekiah,  king  of  Judah,  in  the  tenth  month,  came 
Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of  Babylon,  and  all  his  army, 
against  Jerusalem,  and  they  besieged  it,"  etc. 

But  the  instance  in  the  last  chapter  (the  5  2d)  is  still 
more  glaring,  for  though  the  story  has  been  told  over  and 
over  again,  this  chapter  still  supposes  the  reader  not  to 
know  anything  of  it,  for  it  begins  by  saying,  ver.  i, 
' '  Zedekiah  was  one  and  twenty  years  old  when  he  began 
to  reign^  and  he  reigned  eleven  years  in  Jerusalem^  and 
his  mother' s  tiame  was  Hamutal^  the  daughter  of  Jere- 
miah of  Libnah.  (Ver.  4,)  And  it  came  to  pass  in  the  ninth 
year  of  his  reign^  in  the  tenth  month^  in  the  tenth  day 
of  the  months  that  Nebuchadnezzar^  king  of  Babylon^ 
came,  he  and  all  his  army,  against  Jerusalem,  and 
pitched  against  it,  and  built  forts  against  it,''"'  etc. 

I  have  seen  a  son  of  Jesse  the  Bethlehemite,  that  is  cunning  in  playing,  and  a  mighty 
valiant  man,  and  a  man  of  war,  and  prudent  in  matters,  and  a  comely  person,  and  the 
Lord  is  with  him.  Wherefore  Saul  sent  messengers  unto  Jesse,  and  said,  "  Send  me 
David  thy  son."  "  And  [verse  21,]  David  came  to  Saul,  and  stood  before  him,  and  h« 
loved  him  greatly,  and  he  became  his  armor-bearer.  And  when  the  evil.spirit  from 
God  was  upon  Saul  [ver.  23]  that  David  took  an  harp,  and  played  with  his  hand :  so 
Saul  was  refreshed,  and  was  well." 

But  the  next  chapter  [17]  gives  an  account,  all  different  to  this,  of  the  manner  that 
Saul  and  David  became  acquainted.  Here  it  is  ascribed  to  David's  encounter  with 
Goliah,  when  David  was  sent  by  his  father  to  carry  provision  to  his  brethren  in  the 
camp.  In  the  55th  verse  of  this  chapter  it  is  said,  "And  when  Saul  saw  David  go 
forth  against  the  Philistine  [Goliah],  he  said  unto  Abner,  the  captain  of  the  host,  Abner, 
whose  son  is  this  youth  ?  And  Abner  said.  As  thy  soul  Hveth,  O  king,  I  cannot  tell. 
And  the  king  said.  Enquire  thou  whose  son  the  stripling  is  And  as  David  returned 
from  the  slaughter  of  the  Philistine.  Abner  took  him.  and  brought  him  before  Saul 
with  the  head  of  the  Philistine  in  his  hand.  And  Saul  said  to  him.  Whose  son  art  thou, 
ikou  young  man?  And  David  answered,  /am  the  son  of  thy  servant  Jesse  the  Beth- 
lehemite." These  two  accounts  belie  each  other,  because  each  of  them  supposes  Saul 
and  David  not  to  have  known  each  other  before.  This  book,  the  Bible,  is  too  ridicu- 
lous even  for  criticism. 


AGR  OP   KRASON.  199 

It  is  not  possible  that  any  one  man,  and  more  particu- 
larly Jeremiah,  could  have  been  the  writer  of  this  book. 
The  errors  are  such  as  could  not  have  been  committed  by 
any  person  sitting  down  to  compn^se  a  work.  Were  1,  or 
any  other  man,  to  write  in  such  a  disorded  manner,  no- 
body would  read  what  was  written  ;  and  everybody  wouid 
suppose  that  the  vmter  was  in  a  state  of  insanity.  The 
only  way,  therefore,  to  account  for  this  disorder  is,  that 
the  book  is  a  medley  of  detached,  unauthenticated  anec- 
dotes, put  together  by  some  stupid  book-maker,  under 
the  name  of  Jeremiah,  because  many  of  them  refer  to 
liim  and  to  the  circumstances  of  the  times  he  lived  in. 

Of  the  duplicity,  and  of  the  false  prediction  of  Jeremiah, 
I  shall  mention  two  instances,  and  then  proceed  to  re- 
view the  remainder  of  the  Bible. 

It  appears  from  the  38th  chapter,  that  when  Jeremiah 
was  in  prison,  Zedekiah  sent  for  him,  and  at  this  inter- 
view, which  was  private,  Jeremiah  pressed  it  strongly  on 
Zedekiah  to  surrender  himself  to  the  enemy.  '*-^"  says 
he  (ver.  17,)  ''''thou  7vilt  assuredly  go  forth  unto  the  king 
vf  Babylon' s  princes^  then  thy  soul  shall  live^^^  etc.  Zede- 
kiah was  apprehensive  that  what  passed  at  this  conference 
should  be  known,  and  he  said  to  Jeremiah  (ver.  25),  "If 
the  princes  [meaning  those  of  Judah]  hear  that  I  have 
talked  with  thee,  and  they  come  unto  thee,  and  say  unto 
thee,  Declare  unto  us  now  what  thou  hast  said  unto  the 
Icing ;  hide  it  not  from  us,  and  we  will  not  put  thee  to 
death  ;  and  also  what  the  king  said  unto  thee  ;  then  thou 
shalt  say  unto  them,  I  presented  my  supplication  before 
the  king,  that  he  would  not  cause  me  to  return  to 
Jonathan's  house  to  die  there.  Then  came  all  the 
princes  unto  Jeremiah,  and  asked  him:  and  he  told  them 
according  to  all  the  words  the  king  had  commanded.'' 
Thus,  this  man  of  God,  as  he  is  called,  could  tell  a  lie  01 
very  strongly  prevaricate,  when  he  supposed  it  would 
answer   his   purpose  ;    for  certainly   he   did   not  go   to 


X30  AGE   OK   REASON. 

Zedekiah  to  make  his  supplication,  neither  did  he  make 
it ;  he  went  because  he  was  sent  for,  and  he  employed 
that  opportunity  to  advise  Zedekiah  to  surrender  himself 
to  Nebuchadnezzar. 

In  the  34th  chapter  is  a  prophecy  of  Jeremiah  to  Zede- 
kiah, in  these  words  (ver.  2),  ''Thus  saith  the  Lord,  Behold 
I  will  give  this  city  into  the  hands  of  the  king  of  Babylon, 
and  he  shall  burn  it  with  fire  ;  and  thou  shalt  not  escape 
out  of  his  hand,  but  shalt  surely  be  taken,  and  delivered 
into  his  hand  ;  and  thine  eyes  shall  behold  the  eyes  of  the 
king  of  Babylon,  and  he  shall  speak  with  thee  mouth  to- 
mouth,  and  thou  shalt  go  to   Babylon.       Yei  hear  the 
word  of  the  Lord^  O  Zedekiah^  king  of  Judah^  Thus  saith 
the  Lord,  of  thee,  Thou  shalt  not  die  by  the  sword,  but  thow 
shalt  die  in  peace;  and  with  the  burnings  of  thy  fathers, 
the  former  kings  which  were  before  thee,  so  shall  they 
burn  odors  for  thee,  and  they  will  lament  thee,  saying-, 
Ah,   lord;  for  T  have  pronounced  the   word,  saith   the 
Lord:' 

Now,  instead  of  Zedekiah  beholding  the  eyes  of  the 
king  of  Babylon,  and  speaking  with  him  mouth  to 
mouth,  and  dying  in  peace,  and  with  the  burning  of  odors, 
as  at  the  funeral  of  his  fathers,  (as  Jeremiah  had  declared 
the  Lord  himself  had  pronounced),  the  reverse,  according 
to  the  52nd  chapter,  was  the  case ;  it  is  there  said  (ver. 
10),  "And  the  king  of  Babylon  slew  the  son  of  Zedekiah 
before  his  eyes  ;  Then  he  put  out  the  eyes  of  Zedekiah, 
and  the  king  of  Bal)ylou  bound  him  in  chains,  and  carried' 
him  to  Babylon, and  put  him  in  prison  till  the  day  of  his 
death."  What,  then,  can  we  say  of  these  prophets,  but 
that  they  were  impostors  and  liars? 

As  for  Jeremiah,  he  experienced  none  of  those  evils. 
He  was  taken  into  favor  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  who  gave 
him  in  charge  to  the  captain  of  the  guard  (chap,  xxxix. 
ver.  12),  "Take  him  (said  he)  and  look  well  to  him,  and 
do  him  no  harm  ;  but  do  unto  him  even  as  he  shall  sa3r 


AGE  OF   REASON.  I3IL 

unto  thee."  Jeremiah  joined  himself  afterward  to 
Nebuchadnezzar,  and  went  about  prophesying  for  him 
against  the  Egyptians,  who  had  marched  to  the  relief  of 
Jerusalem  while  it  was  besieged.  Thus  much  for  another 
of  the  lying  prophets,  and  the  book  that  bears  his 
name. 

I  have  been  the  more  particular  in  treating  of  the  books 
ascribed  to  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  because  those  two  are 
spoken  of  in  the  books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles,  which  the 
others  are  not.  The  remainder  of  the  books  ascribed  to 
the  men  called  prophets  I  shall  not  trouble  myself  much 
about,  but  take  them  collectively  into  the  observations  I 
shall  offer  on  the  character  of  the  men  styled  prophets. 

In  the  former  part  of  the  Age  of  Reason^  I  have  said 
that  the  word  prophet  was  the  Bible  word  for  poet,  and 
that  the  flights  and  metaphors  of  Jewish  poets  have  been 
foolishly  erected  into  what  are  now  called  prophecies.  I 
am  sufficiently  justified  in  this  opinion,  not  only  because 
the  books  called  the  prophecies  are  written  in  poetical 
language,  but  because  there  is  no  word  in  the  Bible,  ex- 
cept it  be  the  word  prophet,  that  describes  what  we  mean 
by  a  poet  I  have  also  said,  that  the  word  signifies  a  per- 
former upon  musical  instruments,  of  which  I  have  given 
some  instances,  such  as  that  of  a  company  of  prophets 
prophesying  with  psalteries,  with  tabrets,  with  pipes, 
with  harps,  etc. ,  and  that  Saul  prophesied  with  them, 
I.  Sam.,  chap  x.,  ver.  5.  It  appears  from  this  passage, 
and  from  other  parts  in  the  book  of  Samuel,  that  the 
word  prophet  was  confined  to  signify  poetry  and  music ; 
for  the  person  who  was  supposed  to  have  a  visionary  in- 
sight into  concealed  things,  was  not  a  prophet  but  a  J<?^r* 
(I.  Sam. ,  chap.  ix. ,  ver.  9) ;  and  it  was  not  till  after  the 
word  seer  wentout  of  use  (which  most  probably  was  when 
Saul  banished  those  he  called  wizards)  that  the  profession 

•  I  know  not  what  is  the  Hebrew  word  that  corresponds  to  the  word  seer  in  English  ; 
•but  I  observe  it  is  translated  into  French  by  la  voyant.  from  the  verb  voir,  to  ste\  aod 
-which  means  the  person  who  sees,  or  the  seer. 


132  AGE   OF   REASON. 

of  theseer,  or  the  art  of  seeing,  became  incorporated  into 
the  word  prophet. 

According  to  the  modern  meaning  of  the  word  prophet 
and  prophesying,  it  signifies  foretelling  events  to  a  great 
distance  of  time,  and  it  became  necessary  to  the  inventors 
of  the  Gospel  to  give  it  this  latitude  of  meaning,  in  order 
to  apply  or  to  stretch  what  they  call  the  prophecies  of  the 
Old  Testament  to  the  times  of  the  New  ;  but  according 
to  the  Old  Testament,  the  prophesying  of  the  seer,  and 
afterward  of  the  prophet,  so  far  as  the  meaning  of  the  word 
seer  incorporated  into  that  of  prophet,  had  reference  only 
to  things  of  the  time  then  passing,  or  very  closely  con- 
nected with  it,  such  as  the  event  of  a  battle  they  were 
going  to  engage  in,  or  of  a  journey,  or  of  any  enterprise 
they  were  going  to  undertake,  or  of  any  circumstance 
then  pending,  or  of  any  difficulty  they  were  then  in  ;  all 
of  which  had  immediate  reference  to  themselves  (as  in 
the  case  alread}'  mentioned  of  Ahaz  and  Isaiah  with  re- 
spect to  the  expression,  ''''Behold  a  virgin  shall  conceive 
and  bear  a  son^^'')  and  not  to  any  distant  future  time.  It 
was  that  kind  of  prophesying  that  corresponds  to  what 
we  call  fortune-telling,  such  as  casting  nativities,  pre- 
dicting riches,  fortunate  or  unfortunate  marriages,  con- 
juring for  lost  goods,  etc. ;  and  it  is  the  fraud  of  the 
Christian  Church,  not  that  of  the  Jews,  and  the  ignorance 
and  the  superstition  of  modern,  not  that  of  ancient  times, 
that  elevated  those  poetical,  musical,  conjuring,  dream- 
ing, strolling  gentry  into  the  rank  they  have  since  had. 

But,  besides  this  general  character  of  all  the  prophets, 
they  had  also  a  particular  character.  They  were  in  parties, 
and  they  prophesied  for  or  against,  according  to  the  party 
they  were  with,  as  the  poetical  and  political  writers  of 
the  present  day  write  in  defence  of  the  party  they  asso- 
ciate with  against  the  other. 

After  the  Jews  were  divided  into  two  nations,  that  of 
Judah   and  that  of  Israel,  each  party  had  its  prophets,. 


AGE   OF    REASON.  ^  I33 

whoabused  and  accused  each  other  of  being:  false  prophets, 
lying  prophets,  impostors,  etc. 

The  prophets  of  the  part)-  of  Jiidah  prophesied  against 
the  prophets  of  the  party  of  Israel ;  and  those  of  the  party 
of  Israel  against  those  of  Judah.  This  party  prophesying 
showed  itself  immediately  on  the  separation  under  the 
first  two  rival  kings,  Rehoboam  and  Jeroboam.  The 
prophet  that  cursed  or  prophesied  against  the  altar  that 
Jeroboam  had  built  in  Bethel,  was  of  the  party  of  Judah, 
where  Rehoboam  was  king  ;  and  he  was  waylaid  on  his 
return  home,  by  a  prophet  of  the  party  of  Israel,  who 
said  unto  him  (I.  Kings,  chap,  xiii.),  '"'' Art  thou  the  man 
of  God  that  came  from  Judah  f  andhe  said^  I  am.''''  Then 
the  prophet  of  the  party  of  Israel  said  to  him,  ^''  I  am  a 
prophet  aho^  as  thou  art  {signifying  of  JudaJi)^  and  an 
angel  spake  unto  m,e  by  the  word  of  the  Lord^  sayings 
Bring  him  hack  ivith  thee  into  thine  house^  that  he  may 
eat  bread  and  drink  water :  but  (says  the  i8th  verse)  he 
lied  unto  him.''''  This  event,  however,  according  to  the 
stor>-,  is  that  the  prophet  of  Judah  never  got  back  to 
Judah,  for  he  was  found  dead  on  the  road,  by  the  con- 
trivance of  the  prophet  of  Israel,  who,  no  doubt,  was 
called  a  true  prophet  by  his  own  party,  and  the  prophet 
of  Judah  a  lying  prophet. 

In  tlie  third  chapter  of  the  second  of  Kings,  a  story  is 
related  of  pr()}ihesying  or  conjuring  that  shows,  in  several 
particulars,  the  character  of  a  prophet.  Jehoshaphat,  king 
of  Judah,  and  Jehoram,  king  of  Israel,  had  for  a  while 
ceased  their  party  animosity,  and  entered  into  an  alliance  ; 
and  these  two,  together  with  the  king  of  Edom,  engaged 
in  a  war  against  the  king  of  Moab.  After  uniting  and 
marching  their  armies,  the  story  says,  they  were  in  great 
distress  for  water;  upon  which  Jehoshaphat  said,  "/j 
there  not  here  a  prophet  of  the  Lord^  that  we  may  inquire  oj 
the  I^ord  by  him  ?  and  one  of  the  servants  of  the  king  of 
Israel  said^  Here  is  Klisha. ' '   [Elisha  was  one  of  the  party 


134  ^^^  ^^   REASON. 

ofjudah].  '''•  And  Jehoshaphat^  the  kingofjudah^  said, 
The  word  of  the  Lord  is  with  him.''''  The  story  then  says, 
that  these  three  kings  went  down  to  Elisha  ;  and  when 
Elisha  (who,  as  I  have  said,  was  a  Judahmite  prophet) 
saw  the  king  of  Israel,  he  said  unto  him,  "  What  have  J 
to  do  with  thee  ?  get  thee  to  the  prophets  of  thy  father^ 
and  to  the  prophets  of  thy  ?7tother.  And  the  king  of  Israel 
said  unto  him^  Nay^  for  the  Lord  hath  called  these  three 
kings  together^  to  deliver  them  into  the  hand  of  Moab.'''' 
[Meaning  because  of  the  distress  they  were  in  for 
water.]  Upon  which  Elisha  said,  ''''As  the  Lord  of 
hosts  liveth^  before  whom  I  stand^  surely^  were  it  not 
that  I  regard  the  presence  of  fehoshaphat^  the  king  of 
fudah^  I  would  not  look  towards  thee^  nor  see  theey 
Here  is  all  the  venom  and  vulgarity  of  a  party  prophet. 
We  have  now  to  see  the  performance,  or  manner  of 
prophesying. 

Ver.  15.  '■'-Bring  me^  (said  Elisha,)  a  minstrel :  And 
it  came  to  pass ^  when  the  minstrel  played^  that  the  hand 
of  the  Lord  came  upon  him. ' '  Here  is  the  farce  of  the 
conjurer.  Now  for  the  prophecy:  ''''And  Elisha  said^ 
[singing  most  probably  to  the  tune  he  was  playing,] 
Thus  saith  the  Lord^  make  this  valley  full  of  ditches  ; ' ' 
which  was  just  telling  them  what  every  countryman 
could  have  told  them,  without  either  fiddle  or  farce,  that 
the  way  to  get  water  was  to  dig  for  it. 

But  as  every  conjurer  is  not  famous  alike  for  the  same 
thing,  so  neither  were  those  prophets  ;  for  though  all  of 
them,  at  least  those  I  have  spoken  of,  were  famous  for 
lying,  some  of  them  excelled  in  cursing.  Elisha,  whom 
I  have  just  mentioned,  was  a  chief  in  this  branch  of 
prophesying  ;  it  was  he  that  cursed  the  forty-two  children 
in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  whom  the  two  she-bears  came  and 
devoured.  We  are  to  suppose  that  those  children  were  of 
the  party  of  Israel  ;  but  as  those  who  will  curse  will  lie, 
tliere  is  just  as  much  credit  to  be  given  to  this  story  of 


AGE   OF    REASON.  1^ 

Elisha's  two  she-bears  as  there  is  to  that  of  the  Dragon 
of  Wantley,  of  whom  it  is  said  : 

"  Poor  children  three  devoured  he, 
That  could  not  with  him  grapple ; 
And  at  one  sup  he  ate  them  up, 
As  a  man  would  eat  an  apple." 

There  was  another  description  of  men  called  prophets, 
that  amused  themselves  with  dreams  and  visions  ;  but 
whether  by  night  or  by  day  we  know  not.  These,  if  they 
were  not  quite  harmless,  were  but  little  mischievous.  Of 
this  class  are  : 

Ezekiel  and  Daniel  ;  and  the  first  question  upon  those 
books,  as  upon  all  the  others,  is,  are  they  genuine  ?  that 
is,  were  they  written  by  Ezekiel  and  Daniel  ? 

Of  this  there  is  no  proof,  but  so  far  as  my  own  opinion 
goes,  I  am  more  inclined  to  believe  they  were,  than  that 
they  were  not.  My  reasons  for  this  opinion  are  as  fol- 
lows :  First,  Because  those  books  do  not  contain  inter- 
nal evidence  to  prove  they  were  not  written  by  Ezekiel 
and  Daniel,  as  the  books  ascribed  to  Moses,  Joshua, 
Samuel,  etc.,  prove  they  were  not  written  by  Moses, 
Joshua,  Samuel,  etc. 

Secondly,  Because  they  were  not  written  till  after  the 
Babylonian  captivity  began,  and  there  is  good  reason  to 
believe  that  not  any  book  in  the  Bible  was  written  before 
that  period  ;  at  least  it  is  proveable,  from  the  books 
themselves,  as  I  have  already  shown,  that  they  were  not 
written  till  after  the  commencement  of  the  Jewish 
monarchy. 

Thirdly,  Because  the  manner  in  which  the  books  as- 
cribed to  Ezekiel  and  Daniel  are  written  agrees  with  the 
condition  these  men  were  in  at  the  time  of  writing  them. 

Had  the  numerous  commentators  and  priests,  who  have 
foolishly  employed  or  wasted  their  time  in  pretending  to 
expound  and  unriddle  those  books,  been  carried  into  cap- 
tivity, as  Ezekiel  and  Daniel  were,  it  would  have  greatly 


136  AGE   OF    REASON. 

improved  their  intellects  in  comprehending  the  reason  for 
this  mode  of  writing,  and  have  saved  them  the  trouble  of 
racking  their  invention,  as  they  have  done,  to  no  pur- 
pose ;  for  they  would  have  found  that  themselves  would 
be  obliged  to  write  whatever  they  had  to  write  respecting 
their  own  affairs  or  those  of  tlieir  friends  or  of  their 
country,  in  a  concealed  manner,  as  those  men  have 
done. 

These  two  books  differ  from  all  the  rest,  for  it  is  only 
these  that  are  filled  with  accounts  of  dreams  and  visions  ; 
and  this  difference  arose  from  the  situation  the  writers 
were  in  as  prisoners  of  war,  or  prisoners  of  state,  in  afor- 
ei<rn  country,  which  obliged  them  to  convey  even  the 
most  trifling  information  to  each  other,  and  all  their 
political  projects  or  opinions,  in  obscure  and  metaphorical 
terms.  They  pretended  to  have  dreamed  dreams  and  seen 
visions,  because  it  was  unsafe  for  them  to  speak  facts  or 
plain  language.  We  ought,  however  to  suppose  that  the 
persons  to  whom  they  wrote  understood  what  they  meant, 
and  that  it  was  not  intended  anybody  else  should.  But 
these  busy  commentators  and  priests  have  been  puzzling 
their  wits  to  find  out  what  it  was  not  intended  they 
should  know,  and  with  which  they  have  nothing  to  do. 

Ezekiel  and  Daniel  were  carried  prisoners  to  Babylon 
under  the  first  captivity,  in  the  time  of  Jehoiakim,  nine 
years  before  the  second  captivity  in  the  time  of  Zedekiah. 

The  Jews  were  then  still  numerous,  and  had  consider- 
able force  at  Jerusalem  ;  and  as  it  is  natural  to  suppose 
that  men  in  the  situation  of  Ezekiel  and  Daniel  would  be 
meditating  the  recovery  of  their  country  and  their  own 
deliverance,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  accounts 
of  dreams  and  visions  with  which  those  books  are  filled, 
are  no  other  than  a  disguised  mode  of  correspondence,  to 
facilitate  those  objects  —  it  served  them  as  a  cipher  or 
secret  alphabet.  If  they  are  not  this,  they  are  tales, 
reveries,  and  nonsense  ;   or,  at  least,  a  fanciful    wav   of 


AGE  OF   REASON.  1 37 

wearing  off  the  wearisomeness  of  captivity  ;  but  the  pre- 
sumption is  they  were  the  former. 

Ezekiel  begins  his  books  by  speaking  of  a  vision  of 
cherubims  and  of  a  wheel  within  a  wheel^  which  he  says 
he  saw  by  the  river  Chebar,  in  the  land  of  his  captivity. 
Is  it  not  reasonable  to  suppose,  that  by  the  cherubims  he 
meant  the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  where  they  had  figures 
of  cherubims?  and  by  a  wheel  within  a  wheel  (which,  as 
a  figure,  has  always  been  understood  to  signify  political 
contrivance)  the  project  or  means  of  recovering  Jerusa- 
lem ?  In  the  latter  part  of  this  book,  he  supposes  him- 
self transported  to  Jerusalem  and  into  the  temple  ;  and  he 
refers  back  to  the  vision  on  the  river  Chebar,  and  says 
(chapter  xliii,  verse  3),  that  this  last  vision  was  like 
the  vision  on  the  river  Chebar  ;  which  indicates  that 
those  pretended  dreams  and  visions  had  for  their  object 
the  recovery  of  Jerusalem,  and  nothing  further. 

As  to  the  romantic  interpretations  and  applications, 
wild  as  the  dreams  and  visions  they  undertake  to  ex- 
plain, which  commentators  and  priests  have  made  of  those 
books,  that  of  converting  them  into  things  which  they 
call  prophecies,  and  making  them  bend  to  times  and  cir- 
cumstances as  far  remote  even  as  the  present  day,  it  shows 
the  fraud  or  the  extreme  folly  to  which  credulity  or 
priestcraft  can  go. 

Scarceh  anytliing  can  be  more  absurd  than  to  suppose 
that  men  situated  as  Ezekiel  and  Daniel  were,  whose 
country*  was  overrun  and  in  the  possession  of  the  enemy, 
all  their  friends  and  relations  in  captivity  abroad,  or  in 
slavery  at  home,  or  massacred,  or  in  continual  danger  of 
it  ;  scarcely  anything,  I  say,  can  be  more  absurd,  than  to 
suppose  that  such  men  should  find  nothing  to  do  but  that 
of  employing  their  time  and  their  thoughts  about  what 
was  to  happen  to  other  nations  a  thousand  or  two  thou- 
sand years  after  they  were  dead  ;  at  the  same  time, 
nothing  is  more  natural  than  that  they  should  meditate 


138  AGE   OF    REASON. 

the  recovery  of  Jerusalem,  and  their  own  deliverance  ; 
and  that  this  was  the  sole  object  of  all  the  obscure  and 
apparently  frantic  writings  contained  in  those  books. 

In  this  sense,  the  mode  of  writing  used  in  those  two 
books,  being  forced  by  necessity,  and  not  adopted  by 
choice,  is  not  irrational  ;  but,  if  we  are  to  use  the  books 
as  prophecies,  they  are  false.  In  the  29th  chapter  of 
Kzekiel,  speaking  of  Egypt,  it  is  said,  (ver.  11),  ''''No  foot 
of  man  shall  pass  through  it^  nor  foot  of  beast  shall  pass 
through  it ;  neither  shall  it  be  inhabited  for  forty  years.'''' 
This  is  what  never  came  to  pass,  and  consequently  it  is 
false,  as  all  the  books  I  have  already  reviewed  are.  I  here 
close  this  part  of  the  subject. 

In  the  former  part  of  the  Age  of  Reason  I  have  spoken 
of  Jonah,  and  of  the  story  of  him  and  the  whale.  A  fit 
story  for  ridicule,  if  it  was  written  to  be  believed  ;  or  of 
laughter,  if  it  was  intended  to  try  what  credulity  could 
swallow;  for  if  it  could  swallow  Jonah  and  the  whale,  it 
could  swallow  anything. 

But,  as  is  already  shown  in  the  observations  on  the 
book  of  Job  and  of  Proverbs,  it  is  not  always  certain 
which  of  the  books  in  the  Bible  are  originally  Hebrew, 
or  only  translations  from  the  books  of  the  Gentiles  into 
Hebrew  ;  and  as  the  book  of  Jonah,  so  far  from  treating 
of  the  affairs  of  the  Jews,  says  nothing  upon  that  subject, 
but  treats  altogether  of  the  Gentiles,  it  is  more  probable 
that  it  is  a  book  of  the  Gentiles  than  of  the  Jews,  and  that 
it  has  been  written  as  a  fable,  to  expose  the  nonsense  and 
satirize  the  vicious  and  malignant  character  of  a  Bible 
prophet,  or  a  predicting  priest. 

Jonah  is  represented,  first,  as  a  disobedient  prophet, 
running  away  from  his  mission,  and  taking  shelter  aboard 
a  vessel  of  the  Gentiles,  bound  from  Joppa  to  Tarshish  ; 
as  if  he  ignorantly  supposed,  by  some  paltry  contrivance, 
he  could  hide  himself  where  God  could  not  find  him.  The 
vessel  is  overtaken  by  a  storm  at  sea,  and  the  mariners, 


AGE  OF   REASON.  I39 

all  of  whom  are  Gentiles,  believing  it  to  be  a  judgement, 
on  account  of  some  one  on  board  who  had  committed  a 
crime,  agreed  to  cast  lots  to  discover  the  offender,  and  the 
lot  fell  upon  Jonah.  But,  before  this,  they  had  cast  all 
their  wares  and  merchandise  overboard  to  lighten  the 
vessel,  while  Jonah,  like  a  stupid  fellow,  was  fast  asleep 
in  the  hold. 

After  the  lot  had  designated  Jonah  to  be  the  offender, 
they  questioned  him  to  know  who  and  what  he  was  ?  and 
he  told  them  he  was  a  Hebrew ;  and  the  story  implies 
that  he  confessed  himself  to  be  guilty.  But  these  Gentiles, 
instead  of  sacrificing  him  at  once,  without  pity  or  mercy, 
as  a  company  of  Bible  prophets  or  priests  would  have 
done  by  a  Gentile  in  the  same  case,  and  as  it  is  related 
Samuel  had  done  by  Agag  and  Moses  by  the  women  and 
children,  they  endeavored  to  save  him,  though  at  the  risk 
of  their  own  lives,  for  the  account  says, '  ''Nevertheless  (that 
is,  though  Jonah  was  a  Jew  and  a  foreigner,  and  the  cause 
of  all  their  misfortunes  and  the  loss  of  their  cargo,)  the 
men  rowed  hard  to  bring  it  {the  boat)  to  land^  but  they  could 
not  for  the  sea  wrought  and  was  tempestuous  against  them.^' 
Still,  they  were  unwilling  to  put  the  fate  of  the  lot  into  ex- 
ecution, and  they  cried  (says  the  account)  unto  the  Lord, 
saying,  (v.  14,)  "W^  beseech  thee^  O  Lord^  we  beseech  thee^ 
let  us  not  perish  for  this  man' s  life^  and  lay  not  upon  us 
innocent  blood ;  for  thou^  O  Lord^  hast  done  as  it  pleased 
thee.''''  Meaning,  thereby,  that  they  did  not  presume  to 
judge  Jonah  guilty,  since  that  he  might  be  innocenL ;  but 
that  they  considered  the  lot  that  had  fallen  to  him  as  a 
decree  of  God,  or  as  \\.  pleased  God.  The  address  of  this 
prayer  shows  that  the  Gentiles  worshipped  one  Supreme 
Beingy  and  that  they  were  not  idolaters,  as  the  Jews 
represented  them  to  be.  But  the  storm  still  continuing 
and  the  danger  increasing,  they  put  the  fate  of  the  lot  into 
execution,  and  cast  Jonah  into  the  sea,  where,  according 
to  the  story,  a  great  fish  swallowed  him  up  whole  and  alive. 


140  A(1E   OF   REASON. 

We  have  now  to  consider  Jonah  securely  housed  from 
the  storm  in  the  fish's  belly.  Here  we  are  told  that  he 
prayed  ;  but  the  pra>er  is  a  made-up  prayer,  taken  from 
various  parts  of  the  Psalms,  without  any  connection  or 
consistency,  and  adapted  to  the  distress,  but  not  at  all  to 
the  condition  that  Jonah  was  in.  It  is  such  a  prayer  as 
a  Gentile,  who  might  know  something  of  the  Psalms, 
could  copy  out  for  him.  This  circumstance  alone,  were 
there  no  other,  is  sufficient  to  indicate  that  the  whole  is 
a  made-up  stor}\  The  prayer,  however,  is  supposed  to 
have  answered  the  purpose,  and  the  story  goes  on  (taking 
up  at  the  same  time  the  cant  language  of  a  Bible  prophet), 
saying:  (chap,  ii,  ver.  10,)  ^'' And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
the fish^  and  it  vomited  out  Jonah  upon  the  dry  land." 

Jonah  then  received  a  second  mission  to  Nineveh,  with 
which  he  sets  out  ;  and  we  have  now  to  consider  him  as 
a  preacher.  The  distress  he  is  represented  to  have 
sufiered,  the  remembrance  of  his  own  disobedience  as  the 
cause  of  it,  and  the  miraculous  escape  he  is  supposed  to 
have  had,  were  sufficient,  one  would  conceive,  to  have 
impressed  him  with  sympathy  and  benevolence  in  the 
execution  of  his  mission  ;  but,  instead  of  this,  he  enters 
the  city  with  denunciation  and  malediction  in  his  mouth, 
crying  :  (chap.  iii.  ver.  4,)  "  Yet  forty  days,  and  Nineveh 
shall  be  overthrown. ' ' 

We  have  now  to  consider  this  supposed  missionary  in 
the  last  act  of  his  mission  ;  and  here  it  is  that  the  malevo- 
lent spirit  of  a  Bible-prophet,  or  of  a  predicting  priest, 
appears  in  all  that  blackness  of  character  that  men  as- 
cribe to  the  being  they  call  the  devil. 

Having  published  his  predictions,  he  withdrew,  says 
the  stor>',  to  the  east  side  of  the  city.  But  for  what?  not 
to  contemplate,  in  retirement,  the  mercy  of  his  Creator  to 
himself  or  to  others,  but  to  wait,  with  malignant  im- 
patience, the  destruction  of  Nineveh.  It  came  to  pass, 
however,  as  the  story  relates  that  the  Ninevites  reformed^ 


AGK   OK    REASON.  I4I 

and  that  God,  accordin«^  to  the  Bible  phrase,  repented 
him  of  the  evil  he  had  said  he  would  do  unto  them,  and 
did  it  not.  This,  saith  the  first  verse  of  the  last  chapter, 
'^  displeased  Jonah  exceedingly^  and  he  was  very  angry.'*'' 
His  obdurate  heart  would  rather  that  all  Nineveh  should 
be  destroyed,  and  every  soul,  young  and  old,  perish  in  its 
ruins,  than  that  his  prediction  should  not  be  fulfilled. 
To  expose  the  character  of  a  prophet  still  more,  a  gourd 
is  made  to  grow  np  in  the  night,  that  promised  him  an 
agreeable  shelter  from  the  heat  of  the  sun,  in  the  place 
to  which  he  had  retired,  and  the  next  morning  it  dies. 

Here  the  rage  of  the  prophet  becomes  excessive,  and 
he  is  ready  to  destroy  himself.  '"''  It  is  better^  said  he^for 
me  to  die  than  to  live.''''  This  brings  on  a  supposed  ex- 
postulation between  the  Almighty  and  the  prophet,  in 
which  the  former  says,  '"''  Doest  thou  well  to  be  angry  for 
the  gourd?  And  Jonah  said.,  I  do  well  to  be  angry  even 
unto  death ;  Then.,  said  the  Lord.,  Thou  hast  had  pity  on 
Ihc  gourd.,  for  which  thou  hust  not  labored.,  neither  madest 
it  grotv ;  which  came  up  in  a  night.,  and  perished  in  a 
night ;  and  should  not  I  spare  Nineveh.,  that  great  city.,  in 
which  are  more  than  sixscore  thousand  persons  that  cannot 
discern  between  their  right  ha?id  and  their  left  hand? ' ' 

Here  is  both  the  winding  up  of  the  satire  and  the  moral 
of  the  fable.  As  a  satire,  it  strikes  against  the  character 
of  all  the  Bible  prophets,  and  against,  all  the  indiscrim- 
inate judgments  upon  men,  women,  and  children,  with 
which  this  lying  book,  the  Bible,  is  crowded  ;  such  as 
Noah's  flood,  the  destruction  of  the  cities  of  Sodom  and 
Gomorrah,  the  extirpation  of  the  Canaanites,  even  to  the 
sucking  infants,  and  women  with  child,  because  the  same 
reflection,  that  there  are  more  than  sixscore  thousand 
persons  that  cannot  'discern  between  their  right  hand 
and  their  left  hand.,  meaning  young  children,  applies  to 
all  their  cases.  It  satirizes  also  the  supposed  partiality 
of  the  Creator  for  one  nation  more  than  for  another. 


142  AGE  OF   REASON. 

As  a  moral,  it  preaches  against  the  malevolent  spirit 
of  prediction  ;  for  as  certainly  as  a  man  predicts  ill.  he 
becomes  inclined  to  wish  it.  The  pride  of  having  his 
judgment  right  hardens  his  heart,  till  at  last  he  beholds 
with  satisfaction,  or  sees  with  disappointment,  the  ac- 
complishment or  the  failure  of  his  predictions.  This  book 
ends  with  the  same  kind  of  strong  and  well-directed 
point  against  prophets,  prophecies,  and  indiscriminate 
judgment,  as  the  chapter  that  Benjamin  Franklin  made 
for  the  Bible,  about  Abraham  and  the  stranger,  ends 
against  the  intolerant  spirit  of  religious  persecution. 
Thus  much  for  the  book  of  Jonah. 

Of  the  poetical  parts  of  the  Bible,  that  are  called 
prophecies,  I  have  spoken  in  the  former  part  of  the  Age 
oj  Reason^  and  already  in  this,  where  I  have  said  that 
the  v^or^  prophet  is  the  Bible  word  ioi  poet^  and  that  the 
flights  and  metaphors  of  those  poets,  many  of  which  have 
become  obscure  by  the  lapse  of  time  and  the  change  of 
circumstances,  have  been  ridiculously  erected  into  things 
called  prophecies,  and  applied  to  purposes  the  writers 
never  thought  of.  When  a  priest  quotes  any  of  those 
passages,  he  unriddles  it  agreeably  to  his  own  views,  and 
imposes  that  explanation  upon  his  congregation  as  the 
meaning  of  the  writer.  The  whore  of  Babylon  has  been 
the  common  whore  of  all  the  priests,  and  each  has  ac- 
cused the  other  of  keeping  the  strumpet  ;  so  well  do  they 
agree  in  their  explanations. 

There  now  remain  only  a  few  books,  which  they  call 
books  of  the  lesser  prophets,  and  as  I  have  already  shown 
that  the  greater  are  impostors,  it  would  be  cowardice  to 
disturb  the  repose  of  the  little  ones.  Let  them  sleep, 
then,  in  the  arms  of  their  nurses,  the  priests,  and  both 
be  forgotten  together. 

I  have  now  gone  through  the  Bible,  as  a  man  would 
go  through  a  wood  with  an  axe  on  his  shoulder,  and  fell 
trees.     Here  they  lie  ;  and  the  priests,  if  they  can,  may 


AGE  OF   REASON.  143 

Teplant  them.  They  may,  perhaps,  stick  them  in  the 
ground,  but  they  will  never  make  them  grow.  I  pass  on 
to  the  books  of  the  New  Testament. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

The  New  Testament,  they  tell  us,  is  founded  upon 
the  prophecies  of  the  Old  ;  if  so,  it  must  follow  the  fate 
of  its  foundation. 

As  it  is  nothing  extraordinary  that  a  woman  should  be 
with  child  before  she  was  married,  and  that  the  son  she 
might  bring  forth  should  be  executed,  even  unjustly,  I 
see  no  reason  for  not  believing  that  such  a  woman  as 
Mary,  and  such  a  man  as  Joseph,  and  Jesus  existed  ; 
their  mere  existence  is  a  matter  of  indifference  about 
which  there  is  no  ground  either  to  believe  or  to  disbelieve, 
and  which  comes  under  the  common  head  of.  It  may  be 
so;  and  what  then?  The  probability,  however,  is  that 
there  were  such  persons,  or  at  least  such  as  resembled 
them  in  part  of  the  circumstances,  because  almost  all 
romantic  stories  have  been  suggested  by  some  actual  cir- 
cumstance ;  as  the  adventures  of  Robinson  Crusoe,  not 
a  word  of  which  is  true,  were  suggested  by  the  case  of 
Alexander  Selkirk. 

It  is  not  the  existence,  or  non-existence,  of  the  persons 
that  I  trouble  myself  about ;  it  is  the  fable  of  Jesus  Christ, 
as  told  in  the  New  Testament,  and  the  wild  and  vision- 
ary doctrine  raised  thereon,  against  which  I  contend. 
The  story,  taking  it  as  it  is  told,  is  blasphemously  ob- 
scene. It  gives  an  account  of  a  young  woman  engaged 
to  be  married,  and  while  under  this  engagement  she  is, 
to  speak  plain  language,  debauched  by  a  ghost,  under 
the  impious  pretence  (Luke,  chap,  i.,  ver.  35),  that  ''^  the 
Holy  Ghost  shall  come  upon  thee^  and  the  power  of  the 


144  AGE  OF   REASON. 

Highest  shall  overshadow  thee. ' '  Notwithstanding  which, 
Joseph  afterward  marries  her,  cohabits  with  her  as  his 
wife,  and  in  his  turn  rivals  the  ghost.  This  is  putting  the 
story  into  intelligible  language,  and  when  told  in  this 
manner,  there  is  not  a  priest  but  must  be  ashamed  to 
own  it.  * 

Obscenity  in  matters  of  faith,  however  wrapped  up,  is 
always  a  token  of  fable  and  imposture;  for  it  is  necessarv 
to  our  serious  belief  in  God  that  we  do  not  connect  it 
with  stories  that  run,  as  this  does,  intu  ludicrous  inter- 
pretations. This  story  is  upon  tlie  face  of  it,  the  same 
kind  of  story  as  that  of  Jupiter  and  Leda,  or  Jupiter  and 
Europa,  or  any  of  the  amorous  adventures  of  Jupiter  ; 
and  shows,  as  is  already  stated  in  the  former  part  of  the 
Age  of  Reason^  that  the  Christian  faith  is  built  upon  the 
heathen  mythology. 

As  the  historical  parts  of  the  New  Testament,  so  far  as 
concerns  Jesus  Christ,  are  confined  to  a  ver}-  short  space 
of  time,  less  than  two  years,  and  all  within  the  same 
country,  and  nearly  to  the  same  spot,  the  discordance  of 
time,  place,  and  circumstance,  which  detects  the  fallacy 
of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  proves  them  to  be 
impositions,  cannot  be  expected  to  be  found  here  in  the 
same  abundance.  The  New  Testament  compared  with 
the  Old,  is  like  a  farce  of  one  act,  in  which  there  is 
not  room  for  very  numerous  violations  of  the  unities. 
There  are,  however,  some  glaring  contradictions,  which, 
exclusive  of  the  fallacy  of  the  pretended  prophecies, 
are  sufficient  to  show  the  story  of  Jesus  Christ  to  be 
false. 

I  lay  it  down  as  a  position  which  cannot  be  contro- 
verted, first,  that  the  agreement  of  all  the  parts  of  a 
stor\-  does  not  prove  that  story  to  be  true,  because  the 
parts  may  agree,  and  the  whole  may  be  false  ;  secondly, 

•Mary,  the  supposed  virgiis  mother  of  Jesus,  had  several  other  children,  sons  and 
daughters.     See  Matthew,  chap,  xiii,  verses  55.  56. 


AGE  OF   RKASON.  1 45 

that  the  disagreement  of  the  parts  of  a  story  proves 
the  zvhole  cannot  be  true.  The  agreement  does  not 
prove  true,  but  the  disagreement  proves  falsehood 
positively. 

The  history  of  Jesus  Christ  is  contained  in  the  four 
books  ascribed  to  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John.  The 
first  chapter  of  Matthew  begings  with  giving  a  genealogy 
of  Jesus  Christ  ;  and  in  the  third  chapter  of  Luke,  there 
is  also  given  a  genealogy  of  Jesus  Christ.  Did  those  two 
agree,  it  would  not  prove  the  genealogy  to  be  true,  be- 
cause it  might,  nevertheless,  be  a  fabrication  ;  but  as 
they  contradict  each  other  in  every  particular,  it  proves 
falsehood  absolutely.  If  Matthew  speaks  truth,  Luke 
speaks  falsehood,  and  if  Luke  speaks  truth,  Matthew 
speaks  falsehood  ;  and  as  there  is  no  authority  for  be- 
lieving one  more  than  the  other,  there  is  no  authority 
for  believing  either  ;  and  if  they  cannot  be  believed  even 
in  the  very  first  thing  they  say  and  set  out  to  prove,  they 
are  not  entitled  to  be  believed  in  any  thing  they  say  after- 
ward. Truth  is  a  uniform  thing  ;  and  as  to  inspiration 
and  revelation,  were  we  to  admit  it,  it  is  impossible  to 
suppose  it  can  be  contradictory.  Either,  then,  the  men 
called  apostles  are  impostors,  or  the  books  ascribed  to 
them  has  been  written  by  other  persons  and  fathered 
upon  them,  as  is  the  case  with  the  Old  Testament. 

The  book  of  Matthew  gives,  chap,  i.,  ver  6,  a  genealogy 
bv  name  from  David  up  through  Joseph,  the  husband  of 
Mary,  to  Christ  ;  and  makes  there  to  be  twenty-eight 
generations.  The  book  of  Luke  gives  also  a  genealogy 
by  name  from  Christ,  through  Joseph,  the  husband  of 
Marv,  down  to  David,  and  makes  there  to  ho^  forty-three 
generations  ;  besides  which,  there  are  only  the  two 
names  of  David  and  Joseph  that  are  alike  in  the  two  lists. 
I  here  insert  both  genealogical  lists,  and  for  the  sake  of 
perspicuity  and  comparison,  have  placed  them  both  in 
the  same  direction,  that  is  from  Joseph  down  to  David. 


14^ 


AGB  OF  REASON. 


Genealogy  according  to  Matthew. 

Genealogy  according  to  Luke. 

Christ 

23  Josaphat 

Christ 

23  Neri 

2  Joseph 

24  Asa 

2  Joseph 

24  Melchi 

3  Jacob 

25  Abia 

3  Hell 

25  Addi 

4  Matthan 

26  Roboam 

4  Matthat 

26  Cosam 

5  Eleazar 

27  Solomon 

5  Levi 

'  27  Elmodam 

6  Eliud 

28  David* 

6  Melchi 

28  Er 

7  Achim 

7  Janna 

29  Jose 

8  Sadoc 

8  Joseph 

30  Eliezer 

9  Azor 

9  Mattathias 

31  Jorim 

lo  Eliakim 

10  Amos 

32  Matthat 

II  Abiud 

11  Naum 

33  Levi 

12  Zorobabel 

12  i7.sli 

34  Simeon 

13  Salatliiel 

13  >ag:ge 

35  Juda 

14  Jechonias 

14  Maath 

36  Joseph 

15  Josias 

15  Mattathias 

37  Jonan 

16  Amon 

16  Semei 

38  Eliakim 

17  Manasses 

17  Joseph 

39  Melea 

18  Ezekias 

18  Juda 

40  Menan 

19  Acliaz 

19  Joanna 

41  Mattatha 

20  Joatham 

20  Rhesa 

42  Nathan 

21  Ozias 

21  Zorobabel 

43  David 

22  J  Oram 

22  Salathiel 

Now,  if  these  men,  Matthew  and  Luke,  set  out  with  a 
falsehood  between  them  y^as  these  two  accounts  show  they 
do)  in  the  very  commencement  of  their  history  of  Jesus 
Christ,  and  of  whom  and  of  what  he  was,  what  authority 
^as  I  have  before  asked)  is  there  left  for  believing  the 
strauge  things  they  tell  us  afterward  ?  If  they  cannot  be 
believed  in  their  account  of  his  natural  genealogy,  how 
are  we  to  believe  them  when  they  tell  us  he  was  the  son 
of  God  begotten  by  a  ghost,  and  that  an  angel  announced 
this  in  secret  to  his  mother?  If  they  lied  in  one  gene- 
alogy, why  are  we  to  believe  them  in  the  other?     If  his 

•  From  the  birth  of  David  to  the  birth  of  Christ  is  upwards  of  1080  years  ;  and  as  the 
lifetime  of  Christ  is  not  included,  tliere  are  but27  full  generations.  To  find  therefore 
the  average  nge  of  each  person  mentioned  in  theli-t,  at  ihe  time  liisfin^t  son  was  bom, 
itisonly  necessary  to  divide  lOSOyears  by  27,  which  gives  40  years  for  each  person. 
As  the  lifetime  of  man  was  thenbutof  thesameexti>nt  itis  now,  it  Is  an  absurdity  to 
suppo^  th'it  87  following  generation-;  should  all  be  old  bachelors,  b<'fore  they 
married  ;  .ind  the  more  so,  when  we  are  told,  that  Solomon,  the  next  in  f-uece-ssion 
to  David,  had  a  house  full  of  wives  and  mi-tresses  before  he  was  twenty-one  years  of 
age.  Sd  far  from  this  genealogy  being  a  solemn  truth,  it  is  not  even  a  reasonable  He. 
This  list  of  Luke  gives  about  twenty -six  years  for  the  average  age.and  this  is  too  much . 


AGE   OF    REASON.  147 

natural  genealogy  be  manufactured,  which  it  certainly 
is,  why  are  we  not  to  suppose  that  his  celestial  genealogy 
is  manufactured  also,  and  that  the  whole  is  fabulous? 
Can  any  man  of  serious  reflection  hazard  his  future  hap- 
piness upon  the  belief  of  a  story  naturally  impossible,  re- 
pugnant to  every  idea  of  decency,  and  related  by  persons 
already  detected  of  falsehood  ?  Is  it  not  more  safe  that 
we  stop  ourselves  at  the  plain,  pure,  and  unmixed  be- 
lief of  one  God,  which  is  Deism,  than  that  we  commit 
ourselves  on  an  ocean  of  improbable,  irrational,  indecent 
and  contradictory  tales? 

The  first  question,  however,  upon  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament,  as  upon  those  of  the  Old,  is,  Are  they 
genuine  ?  Were  they  written  by  the  persons  to  whom 
they  are  ascribed  ?  for  it  is  upon  this  ground  only  that 
the  strange  things  related  therein  have  been  credited. 
Upon  this  point  there  is  no  direct  proof  for  or  againsty 
and  all  that  this  state  of  a  case  proves  is  doubtfulness^ 
and  doubtfulness  is  the  opposite  of  belief.  The  state, 
therefore,  that  the  books  are  in,  proves  against  them- 
selves as  far  as  this  kind  of  proof  can  go. 

But  exclusive  of  this,  the  presumption  is  that  the 
books  called  the  Evangelists,  and  ascribed  to  Matthew, 
Mark,  Luke  and  John,  were  not  written  by  Matthew, 
Mark,  Luke  and  John,  and  that  they  are  impositions. 
The  disordered  state  of  the  history  in  those  four  books, 
the  silence  of  one  book  upon  matters  related  in  the  other, 
and  the  disagreement  that  is  to  be  found  among  them, 
implies  that  they  are  the  production  of  some  unconnected 
individuals,  many  years  after  the  things  they  pretend  to 
relate,  each  of  whom  made  his  own  legend  ;  and  not  the 
writings  of  men  living  intimately  together,  as  the  men 
called  the  apostles  are  supposed  to  have  done  —  in  fine, 
that  they  have  been  manufactured,  as  the  books  of  the 
Old  Testament  have  been,  by  other  persons  than  those 
whose  names  they  bear. 


148  AGE    OF   REASON. 

The  ston'  of  the  angel  announcing  what  the  church 
calls  the  immaculate  conception  is  not  so  much  as  men- 
tioned in  the  books  ascribed  to  Mark  and  John  ;  and  is 
differently  related  in  Matthew  and  Luke.  The  former 
says  the  angel  appeared  to  Joseph  ;  the  latter  says  it  was 
to  Mar}- ;  but  either  Joseph  or  Mary  was  the  worst  evi- 
dence that  could  have  been  thought  of,  for  it  was  others 
that  should  have  testified  for  them^  and  not  they  for 
themselves.  Were  any  girl  that  is  now  with  child  to  say, 
and  even  to  swear  it,  that  she  was  gotten  with  child  by  a 
ghost,  and  that  an  angel  told  her  so,  would  she  be  be- 
lieved ?  Certainly  she  would  not.  Why,  then,  are  we 
to  believe  the  same  thing  of  another  girl,  whom  we 
never  saw,  told  by  nobody  knows  who,  nor  when,  nor 
where?  How  strange  and  inconsistent  it  is,  that  the 
same  circumstance  that  would  weaken  the  belief  even  of 
a  probable  story,  should  be  given  as  a  motive  for  be- 
lieving this  one,  that  has  upon  the  face  of  it  every  token 
of  absolute  impossibility  and  imposture  ! 

The  story  of  Herod  destroying  all  the  children  under 
two  years  old,  belongs  altogether  to  the  book  of  Matthew  ; 
not  one  of  the  rest  mentions  anything  about  it.  Had 
such  a  circumstance  been  true,  the  universality  of  it  must 
have  made  it  known  to  all  the  writers,  and  the  thing 
would  have  been  too  striking  to  have  been  omitted  by 
any.  This  writer  tells  us.  that  Jesus  escaped  this 
slaughter  because  Joseph  and  Mary  were  warned  by  an 
angel  to  flee  with  him  unto  Egypt  ;  but  he  forgot  to 
make  any  provision  for  John,  who  was  then  under  two 
years  of  age.  John,  however,  who  stayed  behind,  fared 
as  well  as  Jesus,  who  fled  ;  and,  therefore,  the  story  cir- 
cumstantially belies  itself. 

Not  any  two  of  these  writers  agree  in  reciting,  exactly 
in  the  same  words,  the  written  inscription,  short  as  it  is, 
which  they  tell  us  was  put  over  Christ  when  he  was 
crucified  ;  and  besides  this,  Mark  says  :  He  was  crucified 


AGE  OF   REASON.  I49 

at  the  third  hour  (nine  in  the  morning),  and  John  says 
it  was  the  sixth  hour  (twelve  at  noon).  * 

The  inscriotion  is  thus  stated  in  these  books  : 

Matthew  .  This  is  Jesus,  the  king  of  the  Jews. 

Mark  .    .  .  The  king  cf  the  Jews. 

LuKF    .    .  .  This  is  the  king  of  the  Jews, 

John   .    .  .  yes  us   of  Nazareth,  king  of  the  Jews. 

We  may  infer  from  these  circumstances,  trivial  as  they 
are,  that  those  writers,  whoever  they  were,  and  in  what- 
ever time  they  lived,  were  not  present  at  the  scene.  The 
only  one  of  the  men  called  apostles  who  appears  to  have 
been  near  the  spot  was  Peter,  and  when  he  was  accused 
of  being  one  of  Jesus'  followers,  it  is  said,  (Matthew,  chap, 
xxvi.,  ver.  74,)  "  Then  he  \Peter\  began  to  curse  and  to 
swear ^  sayings  I  know  not  the  man  ! ' '  \et  we  are  now 
called  upon  to  believe  the  same  Peter,  convicted,  by 
their  own  account,  of  perjury.  For  what  reason,  or  on 
what  authority,  shall  we  do  this  ? 

The  accounts  that  are  given  of  the  circumstances  that 
they  tell  us  attended  the  crucifixion  are  differently  re- 
lated in  these  four  books. 

The  book  ascribed  to  Matthew  says,  chap,  xxvii,  v.  45, 
^■^  Now  from  the  sixth  hour  there  was  darkness  over  all 
the  land  unto  the  ninth  hour^  Ver.  51,  52,  53,  ''''  And^ 
behold,  the  veil  of  the  temple  was  rent  in  twain  from  the 
top  to  the  bottom  ;  and  the  earth  did  quake.,  and  the  rocks 
rent ;  and  the  graves  were  opened ;  and  many  bodies  of 
the  saints  which  slept  arose,  and  came  out  0/ the  graves 
after  his  resurrection,  and  went  into  the  holy  city  and 
appeared  unto  many.''''  Such  is  the  account  which  this 
dashing  writer  of  the  book  of  Matthew  gives,  but  in 
which  he  is  not  supported  by  the  writers  of  the  other 
books. 

*  According  to  John,  the  sentence  was  not  passed  till  about  the  sixth  liour  (noon), 
and,  consequently,  the  execution  could  not  be  till  the  afterni^Hjn  ;  but  Mark  savs  ex- 
pressly, that  he  was  crucified  at  the  third  hour  (nine  in  the  morning),  chap.  xv.  verse 
•25.    John,  chap    xix.  verse  14. 


15©  AGE  OF   REASON. 

The  writer  of  tlie  book  ascribed  to  Mark,  in  detailing 
the  circumstances  of  the  crucifixion,  makes  no  mention 
of  any  earthquake,  nor  of  the  rocks  rending,  nor  of  the 
graves  opening,  nor  of  the  dead  men  walking  out.  The 
writer  of  the  book  of  Luke  is  silent  also  upon  the  same 
points.  And  as  to  the  writer  of  the  book  of  John,  though 
he  details  all  the  circumstances  of  the  crucifixion  down 
to  the  burial  of  Christ,  he  says  nothing  about  either  the 
darkness  —  the  veil  of  the  temple — the  earthquake — 
the  rocks — the  graves  —  nor  the  dead  men. 

Now,  if  it  had  been  true  that  those  things  had  hap- 
pened, and  if  the  writers  of  those  books  had  lived  at  the 
time  they  did  happen,  and  had  been  the  persons  they  are 
said  to  be,  namely,  the  four  men  called  apostles,  Mat- 
thew, Mark,  Luke  and  John,  it  was  not  possible  for  them, 
as  true  historians,  even  without  the  aid  of  inspiration,  not 
to  have  recorded  them.  The  things,  supposing  them  to 
have  been  facts,  were  of  too  much  notoriety  not  to  have 
been  known,  and  of  too  much  importance  not  to  have 
been  told.  All  these  supposed  apostles  must  have  been 
witnesses  of  the  earthquake,  if  there  had  been  any  ;  for 
it  was  not  possible  for  them  to  have  been  absent  from  it ; 
the  opening  of  the  graves  and  the  resurrection  of  the  dead 
men,  and  their  walking  about  the  city,  is  of  greater  im- 
portance than  the  earthquake.  An  earthquake  is  always 
possible  and  natural,  and  proves  nothing  ;  but  this  open- 
ing of  the  graves  is  supernatural,  and  directly  in  point  ta 
their  doctrine,  their  cause,  and  their  apostleship.  Had  it 
been  true,  it  would  have  filled  up  whole  chapters  of  those 
books,  and  been  the  chosen  theme  and  general  chorus  of 
all  the  writers ;  but  instead  of  this,  little  and  trivial  things, 
and  mere  prattling  conversations  of,  he  said  this^  and  he 
said  that^  are  often  tediously  detailed,  while  this,  most 
important  of  all,  had  it  been  true,  is  passed  oflf  in  a 
slovenly  manner  by  a  single  dash  of  the  pen,  and  that  by 
one  writer  only,  and  not  so  much  as  hinted  at  by  the  rest 


AGE   OF    REASON.  I5I 

It  is  an  easy  thing  to  tell  a  lie,  but  it  is  diflScult  to  sup- 
port the  lie  after  it  is  told.  The  writer  of  the  book  of 
Matthew  should  have  told  us  who  the  .saints  were  that 
came  to  life  again,  and  went  into  the  city,  and  what  be- 
came of  them  afterward,  and  who  it  was  that  saw  them 
—  for  lie  is  not  hardy  enough  to  say  he  saw  them  him- 
self ;  whether  they  came  out  naked,  and  all  in  natural 
buff,  he-saints  and  she-saints  ;  or  whether  they  came  full 
dressed,  and  where  they  got  their  dresses  ;  whether  they 
went  to  their  former  habitations,  and  reclaimed  their 
wives,  their  husbands,  and  their  property,  and  how  they 
were  received  ;  whether  they  entered  ejectments  for  the 
recovery  of  their  possessions,  or  brought  actions  of  crim. 
con.  against  the  rival  interlopers  ;  whether  they  remained 
on  earth,  and  followed  their  fonner  occupation  of  preach- 
ing or  working ;  or  whether  they  died  again,  or  went 
back  to  their  graves  alive,  and  buried  themselves. 

Strange,  indeed,  that  an  army  of  saints  should  return 
to  life,  and  nobody  iuow  who  they  were,  nor  who  it  was 
that  saw  them,  and  that  not  a  word  more  should  be  said 
upon  the  subject,  nor  these  saints  have  anything  to  tell 
us  !  Had  it  been  the  prophets  who  (as  we  are  told)  had 
fonnerly  prophesied  of  these  things,  they  must  have  had  a 
great  deal  to  say.  They  could  have  told  us  everything 
and  we  should  have  had  posthumous  prophecies,  with 
notes  and  commentaries  upon  the  first,  a  little  better 
at  least  than  we  have  now.  Had  it  been  Moses  and 
Aaron  and  Joshua  and  Samuel  and  David,  not  an  uncon- 
verted Jew  had  remained  in  all  Jerusalem.  Had  it  been 
John  the  Baptist,  and  the  saints  of  the  time  then  present, 
everybody  would  have  known  them,  and  they  would  have 
out-preached  and  out-famed  all  the  other  apostles.  But, 
instead  of  this,  these  saints  were  made  to  pop  up,  like 
Jonah's  gourd  in  the  night,  for  no  purpose  at  all  but  to 
wither  in  the  morning.  Thus  much  for  this  part  of  the 
story. 


153  AGE   OF    REASON. 

The  tale  of  the  resurrection  follows  that  of  the  cruci- 
fixion, and  in  this  as  well  as  in  that,  the  writers,  who- 
ever they  were,  disagree  so  much  as  to  make  it  evident 
that  none  of  them  were  there. 

The  book  of  Matthew  states  that  when  Christ  was  put 
in  the  sepulchre,  the  Jews  applied  to  Pilate  for  a  watch 
or  a  guard  to  be  placed  over  the  sepulchre,  to  prevent  the 
body  being  stolen  by  the  disciples  ;  and  that,  in  conse- 
quence of  this  request,  the  sepulchre  was  made  sure^ 
sealing  the  stone  that  covered  the  mouth,  and  setting  a 
watch.  But  the  other  books  say  nothing  about  this  ap- 
plication, nor  about  the  sealing,  nor  the  guard,  nor  the 
watch  ;  and  according  to  their  accounts,  there  were  none. 
Matthew,  however,  follows  up  this  part  of  the  story  of 
the  guard  or  the  watch  with  a  second  part,  that  I  shall 
notice  in  the  conclusion,  as  it  serves  to  detect  the  fallacy 
of  these  books. 

The  book  of  Matthew  continues  its  account,  and  says 
(chap,  xxviii.,  ver.  i),  that  at  the  end  of  the  Sabbath,  as 
it  began  to  dawn,  toward  the  first  day  of  the  week,  came 
Mary  Magdalene  and  the  other  Mary,  to  see  the  sepul- 
chre. Mark  says  it  was  sun-rising,  and  John  says  it  was 
dark.  Luke  says  it  was  Mary  Magdalene  and  Joanna, 
and  Mary,  the  mother  of  James,  and  other  women,  that 
came  to  the  sepulchre  ;  and  John  states  that  Mary  Mag- 
dalene came  alone.  So  well  do  they  agree  about  their 
first  evidence  !  they  all,  however,  appear  to  have  known 
most  about  Mary  Magdalene  ;  she  was  a  woman  of  a  large 
acquaintance,  and  it-^vas  not  an  ill  conjecture  that  she 
might  be  upon  the  stroll. 

The  book  of  Matthew  goes  on  to  say  (ver.  2),  ' '  And 
behold  there  was  a  great  earthquake,  for  the  angel  of 
the  Lord  descended  from  heaven,  and  came  aud  rolled 
back  the  stone  from  the  door,  and  sat  upon  it."  But 
the  other  books  say  nothing  about  any  earthquake,  nor 
about  the  angel  rolling  back  the  stone  and  sitting  upon 


AGE  OF  REASON.  I53 

it,  and  according  to  their  account,  there  was  no  angel 
sitting  there.  Mark  says  the  angel  was  within  the  sep- 
ulchre, sitting  on  the  right  side.  Luke  says  there  were 
two,  and  they  were  both  standing  up  ;  and  John  says  they 
were  both  sitting  down,  one  at  the  head  and  the  other  at 
the  feet. 

Matthew  says  that  the  angel  that  was  sitting  upon  the 
stone  on  the  outside  of  the  sepulchre  told  the  two  Marys 
that  Christ  was  risen,  and  that  the  women  went  away 
quickly.  Mark  says  that  the  women,  upon  seeing  the 
stone  rolled  away,  and  wondering  at  it,  went  into  the 
sepulchre,  and  that  it  was  the  angel  that  was  sitting 
within  on  the  right  side,  that  told  them  so.  Luke 
says  it  was  the  two  angels  that  were  standing  up ;  and 
John  says  it  was  Jesus  Christ  himself  that  told  it  to  Mary 
Magdalene,  and  that  she  did  not  go  into  the  sepulchre, 
but  only  stooped  down  and  looked  in. 

Now,  if  the  writer  of  those  four  books  had  gone  into 
a  court  of  justice  to  prove  an  alibi  {iox  it  is  of  the  nature 
of  an  alibi  that  is  here  attempted  to  be  proved,  namely, 
the  absence  of  a  dead  body  by  supernatural  means),  and 
had  they  given  their  evidence  in  the  same  contradictor^' 
manner  as  it  is  here  given,  they  would  have  been  in 
danger  of  having  their  ears  cropped  for  perjury,  and 
would  have  justly  deserved  it.  Yet  this  is  the  evidence, 
and  these  are  the  books  that  have  been  imposed  upon  the 
world,  as  being  g^ven  by  divine  inspiration,  and  as  the 
nnchangeable  word  of  God. 

The  writer  of  the  book  of  Matthew,  after  giving  this 
account,  relates  a  story  that  is  not  to  be  found  in  any  of 
the  other  books,  and  which  is  the  same  I  have  iust  before 
alluded  to. 

"Now,"  says  he  (that  is,  after  the  conversation  the 
women  had  with  the  angel  sitting  upon  the  stone), 
*'  behold  some  of  the  watch  [meaning  the  watch  that  he 
had  said  had  been  placed  over  the  sepulchre]  came  into 


154  AGE  OF   REASON. 

the  city,  showed  unto  the  chief  priests  all  the  things 
that  were  done ;  and  when  they  were  assembled  with  the 
elders  and  had  taken  counsel,  they  gave  large  money 
unto  the  soldiers,  saying.  Say  ye  His  disciples  came 
by  night,  and  stole  him  away  while  we  slept;  and  if  this 
come  to  the  governor's  ears,  we  will  persuade  him,  and 
secure  you.  So  they  took  the  money,  and  did  as  they 
were  taught ;  and  this  saying  [that  his  disciples  stole  him 
away]  is  commonly  reported  among  the  Jews  until  this 
day." 

The  expression,  until  this  day^  is  an  evidence  that  the 
book  ascribed  to  Matthew  was  not  written  by  Matthew, 
and  that  it  had  been  manufactured  long  after  the  time 
and  things  of  which  it  pretends  to  treat  ;  for  the  ex- 
pression implies  a  great  length  of  intervening  time.  It 
would  be  inconsistent  in  us  to  speak  in  this  manner  of 
anything  happening  in  our  own  time.  To  give  there- 
fore, intelligible  meaning  to  the  expression,  we  must 
suppose  a  lapse  of  some  generations  at  least,  for  this  man- 
ner of  speaking  carries  the  mind  back  to  ancient  time. 

The  absurdity  also  of  the  story  is  worth  noticing;  for  it 
shows  the  writer  of  the  book  of  Matthew  to  have  been  an 
exceedingly  weak  and  foolish  man.  He  tells  a  story  that 
contradicts  itself  in  point  of  possibility;  for  through  the 
guard,  if  there  were  any,  might  be  made  to  say  that  the 
body  was  taken  away  while  they  were  asleep^  and  to  give 
that  as  a  reason  for  their  not  having  prevented  it,  that 
same  sleep  must  also  have  prevented  their  knowing  how 
and  by  whom  it  was  done,  and  yet  they  are  made  to  say, 
that  it  was  the  disciples  who  did  it.  Were  a  man  to  ten- 
der his  evidence  of  something  that  he  should  say  was 
done,  and  of  the  manner  of  doing  it,  and  of  the  person 
who  did  it,  while  he  was  asleep,  and  could  know  nothing 
of  the  matter,  such  evidence  could  not  be  received  ;  it 
will  do  well  enough  for  Testament  evidence,  but  not  for 
anything  where  truth  is  concerned. 


AGE  OP   REASON.  I55 

I  come  now  to  that  part  of  the  evidence  in  those  books, 
that  respects  the  pretended  appearance  of  Christ  after  this 
pretended  resurrection. 

The  writer  of  the  book  of  Matthew  relates,  that  the 
angel  that  was  sitting  on  the  stone  at  the  mouth  of  the 
sepulchre,  said  to  the  two  Mar\-s,  chap,  xxviii.,  ver.  7, 
'"''Behold  Christ  has  gone  before  you  into  Galilee^  there 
shall  ye  see  him  ;  lo^  I  have  told  you. ' '  And  the  same  writei 
at  the  next  two  verses  (8,  9),  makes  Christ  himself  to 
speak  to  the  same  purpose  to  these  women  immediately 
after  the  angel  had  told  it  to  them,  and  that  they  ran 
quickly  to  tell  it  to  the  disciples  ;  and  at  the  i6th  verse 
it  is  said,  "  Then  the  eleven  disciples  went  away  into 
Galilee^  into  a  mountain  where  Jesus  had  appointed 
them  ;  and  when  they  saw  him,  they  worshiped  him." 

But  the  writer  of  the  book  of  John  tells  us  a  story  very 
different  to  this;  for  he  says,  chap,  xx.,  ver.  19,  ''''Then 
the  same  day  at  evenings  being  the  first  day  of  the  week 
[that  is,  the  same  day  that  Christ  is  said  to  have  risen,] 
Tjuhen  the  doors  were  shut^  where  the  disciples  were  as- 
sembled^ for  fear  of  the  Jews  ^  came  Jesus  and  stood  in  the 
midst  of  them. ' ' 

According  to  Matthew  the  eleven  were  marching  to 
Galilee  to  meet  Jesus  in  a  mountain,  by  his  own  ap- 
pointment, at  the  very  time  when,  according  to  John, 
they  were  assembled  in  another  place,  and  that  not  by 
appointment,  but  in  secret,  for  fear  of  the  Jews. 

The  writer  of  the  book  of  Luke  contradicts  that  of 
Matthew  more  pointedly  than  John  does  ;  for  he  says  ex- 
pressly that  the  meeting  was  in  Jerusalem  the  evening 
of  the  same  day  that  he  [Christ]  rose,  and  that  the  eleven 
were  there.     See  Luke,  chap,    xxiv,  ver.  13,  33. 

Now,  it  is  not  possible,  unless  we  admit  these  sup- 
posed disciples  the  right  of  willful  lying,  that  the  writer 
of  those  books  could  be  any  of  the  eleven  persons  called 
disciples  ;  for  if,  according  to  Matthew,  the  eleven  went 


156  AGE  OF   REASON. 

into  Galilee  to  meet  Jesus  in  a  mountain  by  his  own  ap' 
pointment,  on  the  same  day  that  he  is  said  to  have  risen, 
Luke  and  John  must  have  been  two  of  that  eleven  ;  yet 
the  writer  of  Luke  says  expressly,  and  John  implies  as 
much,  that  the  meeting  was  that  same  day,  in  a  house  in 
Jerusalem  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  if,  according  to 
Luke  and  John,  the  eleven  were  assembled  in  a  house  in 
Jerusalem,  Matthew  must  have  been  one  of  that  eleven  ; 
yet  Matthew  says  the  meeting  was  in  a  mountain  in  Gali- 
lee, and  consequently  the  evidence  given  in  those  books 
destroys  each  other. 

The  writer  of  the  book  of  Mark  says  nothing  about  any 
meeting  in  Galilee  ;  but  he  says,  chap,  xvi,  ver.  12,  that 
Christ,  after  his  resurrection,  appeared  in  another  form 
to  two  of  them  as  they  walked  into  the  country,  and 
that  these  two  told  it  to  the  residue,  who  would  not  be- 
lieve them.  Luke  also  tells  a  story  in  which  he  keeps 
Christ  employed  the  whole  day  of  this  pretended  resur- 
rection, until  the  evening,  and  which  totally  invalidates 
the  account  of  going  to  the  mountain  in  Galilee.  He 
says  that  two  of  them,  without  saying  which  two,  went 
that  same  day  to  a  village  call  Emmaus,  three  score  fur- 
longs (seven  miles  and  a  half)  from  Jerusalem,  and  that 
Christ,  in  disguise,  went  with  them,  and  stayed  with 
them  unto  the  evening,  and  supped  with  them,  and  then 
vanished  out  of  their  sight,  and  re-appeared  that  same 
evening  at  the  meeting  of  the  eleven  in  Jerusalem. 

This  is  the  contradictory  manner  in  which  the  evidence 
of  this  pretended  re-appearance  of  Christ  is  stated  ;  the 
only  point  in  which  the  writers  agree,  is  the  skulking 
privacy  of  that  re-appearance  ;  for  whether  it  was  in  the 
recess  of  a  mountain  in  Galilee,  or  a  shut-up  house  in 
Jerusalem,  it  was  still  skulking.  To  what  cause,  then, 
aie  we  to  assign  this  skulking?  On  the  one  hand  it  is 
directly  repugnant  to  the  supposed  or  pretended  end  — 
that  of  convincing  the  world  that  Christ  had  risen  ;  and 


AGE   OF    REASON.  1 57 

on  the  other  hand,  to  have  asserted  the  publicity  of  it 
would  have  exposed  the  writers  of  those  books  to  public 
detection,  and,  therefore,  they  have  been  under  the  ne- 
cessity of  making  it  a  private  affair. 

As  to  the  account  of  Christ  being  seen  by  more  than 
five  hundred  at  once,  it  is  Paul  only  who  says  it,  and  not 
the  five  hundred  who  say  it  for  themselves.  It  is,  there- 
fore, the  testimony  of  but  one  man,  and  that,  too,  of  a 
man  who  did  not,  according  to  the  same  account,  believe 
a  word  of  the  matter  himself  at  the  time  it  is  said  to  have 
hanf)ened.  His  evidence,  supposing  him  to  have  been 
the  writer  of  the  15th  chapter  of  Corinthians,  where  this 
account  is  given,  is  like  that  of  a  man  who  comes  into  a 
court  of  justice  to  swear  that  what  he  had  sworn  before  is 
false.  A  man  may  often  see  reason,  and  he  has,  too, 
always  the  right  ofchanging  his  opinion  ;  but  this  liberty 
does  not  extend  to  matters  of  fact. 

I  now  come  to  the  last  scene,  that  of  the  ascension  into 
heaven.  Here  all  fear  of  the  Jews,  and  of  everything 
else,  must  necessarily  have  been  out  of  the  question  :  it 
was  that  which,  if  true,  was  to  seal  the  whole,  and  upon 
which  the  reality  of  the  future  mission  of  the  disciples 
was  to  rest  for  proof  Words,  whether  declarations  or 
promises,  that  passed  in  private,  either  in  the  recess 
of  a  mountain  in  Galilee  or  in  a  shut-up  house  in  Jeru- 
salem, even  supposing  them  to  have  been  spoken,  could 
not  be  evidence  in  public  ;  it  was  cherefore  necessary  that 
this  last  scene  should  preclude  the  possibility  of  denial 
and  dispute,  and  that  it  should  be,  as  I  have  stated  in  the 
former  part  of  the  .{^e  of  Reason^  as  public  and  as  visible 
as  the  sun  at  noonday  ;  at  least  it  ought  to  have  been  as 
public  as  the  crucifixion  is  reported  to  have  been.  But  to 
come  to  the  point. 

In  the  first  place,  the  writer  of  the  book  of  Matthew 
does  not  say  a  syllable  about  it  ;  neither  does  the  writer 
of  the  book  of  John.     This  being  the  case,  it  is  not  pos- 


158  AGE   OF    REASON. 

sible  to  suppose  that  those  writers,  who  effect  to  be  even 
minute  in  other  matters,  would  have  been  silent  upon 
this,  had  it  been  true?  The  writer  of  the  book  of  Mark 
passes  it  off  in  a  careless,  slovenly  manner,  with  a  single 
dash  of  the  pen,  as  if  he  was  tired  of  romancing  or 
ashamed  of  the  story.  So  also  does  the  writer  of  Luke. 
And  even  between  these  two,  there  is  not  an  apparent 
agreement  as  to  the  place  where  his  final  parting  is  said 
to  have  been. 

The  book  of  Mark  says  that  Christ  appeared  to  the 
eleven  as  they  sat  at  meat,  alluding  to  the  meeting  of  the 
eleven  at  Jerusalem  ;  he  then  states  the  conversation  that 
he  says  passed  at  that  meeting  ;  and  immediately  after 
says  (as  a  school-boy  would  finish  a  dull  story)  ^^  So  theriy 
after  the  Lord  had  spoken  unto  them,  he  was  received  up 
into  heaven  and  sat  on  the  right  hand  of  God."  But  the 
writer  of  Luke  says,  that  the  ascension  was  from  Bethany  ; 
that  he  [Christ]  led  them  out  as  far  as  Bethany^  attd  was 
parted  from  them^  and  was  carried  up  into  heaven. 
So  also  was  Mahomet ;  and  as  to  Moses,  the  apostle  Jude 
says,  ver.  9  ^'^  that  Michael  and  the  devil  disputed  about 
his  bodyy  While  we  believe  such  fables  as  these,  or 
either  of  them,  we  believe  unworthily  of  the  Almighty. 

I  have  now  gone  through  the  examination  of  the  four 
books  ascribed  to  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and  John  ;  and 
when  it  is  considered  that  the  whole  space  of  time  from 
the  crucifixion  to  what  is  called  the  ascension  is  but  a  few 
<iays,  apparently  not  more  than  three  or  four,  and  that 
all  the  circumstances  are  said  to  have  happened  nearly 
about  the  same  spot,  Jerusalem,  it  is,  I  believe,  impossible 
to  find  in  any  storj'  upon  record  so  many  and  such 
glaring  absurdities,  contradictions  and  falsehoods  as  are 
in  those  books.  They  are  more  numerous  and  striking 
than  I  had  any  expectation  of  finding  when  I  began  this 
examination,  and  far  more  so  than  I  had  any  idea  of 
when  I  wrote  the  former  ^>';'-'     f  the  Ac^e  of  Reason.     I 


AGE  OF    REASON.  1 59 

had  then  neither  Bible  nor  Testament  to  refer  to,  nor 
could  I  procure  any.  My  own  situation,  even  as  to  ex- 
istence, was  becoming  every  day  more  precarious,  and  as 
I  was  willing  to  leave  something  behind  me  on  the  sub- 
ject, I  was  obliged  to  be  quick  and  concise.  The  quota- 
lions  I  then  made  were  from  memory  only,  but  they  are 
correct  ;  and  the  opinions  I  have  advanced  in  that  work 
are  the  effect  of  the  most  clear  and  long-established  con- 
viction that  the  Bible  and  the  Testament  are  impositions 
upon  the  world,  that  the  fall  of  man,  the  account  of  Jesus 
Christ  being  the  Son  of  God,  and  of  his  dying  to  appease 
the  wrath  of  God,  and  of  salvation  by  that  strange 
means,  are  all  fabulous  inventions,  dishonorable  to  the 
wisdom  and  power  of  the  Almighty  ;  that  the  only  true 
religion  is  Deism,  by  which  I  then  meant,  and  mean 
now,  the  belief  of  one  God,  and  an  imitation  of  his  moral 
character,  or  the  practice  of  what  are  called  moral  vir- 
tues—  and  that  it  was  upon  this  only  (so  far  as  religion 
is  concerned)  that  I  rested  all  my  hopes  of  happiness  here- 
after.    So  say  I  now  —  and  so  help  me  God. 

But  to  return  to  the  subject.  Though  it  is  impossible, 
at  this  distance  of  time,  to  ascertain  as  a  fact  who  were 
the  writers  of  those  four  books  (and  this  alone  is  suffi- 
cient to  hold  them  in  doubt,  and  where  we  doubt  we  do 
not  believe),  it  is  not  difficult  to  ascertain  negatively  that 
they  were  not  written  by  the  persons  to  whom  they  are 
ascribed.  The  contradictions  in  those  books  demonstrate 
two  things  : 

First,  that  the  writers  could  not  have  been  eye-witnesses 
and  ear-witnesses  of  the  matters  they  relate,  or  they 
would  have  related  them  without  those  contradictions  ; 
and  consequently,  that  the  books  have  not  been  written 
by  the  persons  called  apostles,  who  are  supposed  to  have 
been  witnesses  of  this  kind. 

Secondly,  that  the  writers,  whoever  they  were,  have 
not  acted  in  concerted  imposition  ;  but  each  writer  separ- 


l6o  AGE   OF   REASON. 

ately  and  individually  for  himself,  and  without  the  know- 
ledge  of  the  other. 

The  same  evidence  that  applies  to  prove  the  one,  ap- 
plies equally  to  prove  both  cases ;  that  is,  that  the  books 
were  not  written  by  the  men  called  apostles,  and  also 
that  they  are  not  a  concerted  imposition.  As  to  inspira- 
tion, it  is  altogether  out  of  the  question  ;  we  may  as  well 
attempt  to  unite  truth  and  falsehood,  as  inspiration  and 
contradiction. 

If  four  men  are  eye-witnesses  and  ear-witnesses  to  a 
scene,  tliey  will,  without  any  concert  between  them, 
agree  as  to  time  and  place  when  and  where  that  scene 
happened.  Their  individual  knowledge  of  the  things 
each  one  knowing  it  for  himself,  renders  concert  totally 
unnecessary  ;  the  one  will  not  say  it  was  in  a  mountain 
in  the  country-,  and  the  other  at  a  house  in  town  :  the 
one  will  not  say  it  was  at  sunrise,  and  the  other  that  it 
was  dark.  For  in  whatever  place  it  was,  at  wliatever 
time  it  was,  they  know  it  equally  alike. 

And,  on  the  other  hand,  if  four  men  concert  a  story, 
they  will  make  their  separate  relations  of  that  story 
agree  and  corroborate  with  each  other  to  support  the 
whole.  That  concert  supplies  the  want  of  fact  in  the  one 
case,  as  the  knowledge  of  the  fact  supersedes,  in  the  other 
case,  the  necessity  of  a  concert.  The  same  contradic- 
tions, therefore,  that  prove  that  there  has  been  no  con- 
cert, prove  also  that  the  reporters  had  no  knowledge  of 
the  fact  (or  rather  of  that  which  they  relate  as  a  kxt), 
and  detect  also  the  falsehood  of  their  reports.  Those 
books,  therefore,  have  neither  been  written  by  the  men 
called  apostles,  nor  by  impostors  in  concert.  How  then 
liave  they  been  written? 

I  am  not  one  of  those  who  are  fond  of  believing  there 
is  much  of  that  which  is  called  willful  lying,  or  lying 
originally,  except  in  the  case  of  men  setting  up  to  be 
prophets,  as  in  the  Old  Testament ;  for  prophesying  '\& 


AGE  OF   REASON.  l6l 

lying  professionally.  In  almost  all  other  cases,  it  is  not 
difficult  to  discover  the  progress  by  which  even  simple 
supposition,  with  the  aid  of  credulity,  will,  in  time,  grow 
into  a  lie,  and  at  last  be  told  as  a  fact ;  and  whenever  we 
can  find  a  charitable  reason  for  a  thing  of  this  kind,  we 
ought  not  to  indulge  a  severe  one. 

The  story  of  Jesus  Christ  appearing  after  he  was  dead 
is  the  story  of  an  apparition,  such  as  timid  imaginations 
can  always  create  in  vision,  and  credulity  believe. 
Stories  of  this  kind  had  been  told  of  the  assassination  of 
Julius  Caesar,  not  many  years  before  ;  and  they  generally 
have  their  origin  in  violent  deaths,  or  in  the  execution  of 
innocent  persons.  In  cases  of  this  kind,  compassion 
lends  its  aid  and  benevolently  stretches  the  story.  It  goes 
on  a  little  and  a  little  further  till  it  becomes  a  most  cer- 
tain truth.  Once  start  a  ghost  and  credulity  fills  up  the 
history  of  its  life,  and  assigns  the  cause  of  its  appearance ! 
one  tells  it  one  way,  another  another  way,  till  there  are 
as  many  stories  about  the  ghost  and  about  the  proprietor 
of  the  ghost,  as  there  are  about  Jesus  Christ  in  these  four 
books. 

The  story  of  the  appearance  of  Jesus  Christ  is  told  with 
that  strange  mixture  of  the  natural  and  impossible  that 
distinguishes  legendary  tale  from  fact.  He  is  represented 
as  suddenly  coming  in  and  going  out  when  the  doors 
were  shut,  and  of  vanishing  out  of  sight  and  appearing 
again,  as  one  would  conceive  of  an  unsubstantial  vision  ; 
then  again  he  is  hungn',  sits  down  to  meat,  and  eats  his 
supper.  But  as  those  who  tell  stories  of  this  kind  never 
provide  for  all  the  cases,  so  it  is  here  ;  they  have  told  us 
that  when  he  arose  he  left  his  grave  clothes  behind  him  ; 
but  they  have  forgotten  to  provide  other  clothes  for  him 
to  appear  in  afterward,  or  to  tell  us  what  he  did  with  them 
when  he  ascended  — whether  he  stripped  all  off,  or  went 
up  clothes  and  all.  In  the  case  of  Elijah,  they  have  been 
careful  enough  to  make  him  throw   down  his  mantle  ; 


l62  AGE  OF   REASON. 

how  it  happened  not  to  be  burned  in  the  chariot  of  fire 
they  also  have  not  told  us.  But  as  imagination  supplies 
all  deficiencies  of  this  kind,  we  may  suppose,  if  we  please, 
that  it  was  made  of  salamander's  wool. 

Those  who  are  not  much  acquainted  with  ecclesiastical 
history  may  suppose  that  the  book  called  the  New  Testa- 
ment has  existed  ever  since  the  time  of  Jesus  Christ,  as 
they  suppose  that  the  books  ascribed  to  Moses  have  ex- 
isted ever  since  the  time  of  Moses.  But  the  fact  is  his- 
torically otherwise.  There  was  no  such  book  as  the  New 
Testament  till  more  than  three  hundred  years  after  the 
time  that  Christ  is  said  to  have  lived. 

At  what  time  the  books  ascribed  to  Matthew,  Mark, 
Luke  and  John  began  to  appear  is  altogether  a  matter  of 
uncertainty.  There  is  not  the  least  shadow  of  evidence 
of  who  the  persons  were  that  wrote  them,  nor  at  what 
time  they  were  written  ;  and  they  might  as  well  have 
been  called  by  the  names  of  any  of  the  other  supposed 
apostles,  as  by  the  names  they  are  now  called.  The 
originals  ar-  not  in  the  possession  of  any  Christian  Church 
existing,  any  more  than  the  two  tables  of  stone  written 
on,  they  pretend,  by  the  finger  of  God,  upon  Mount 
Sinai,  and  given  to  Moses,  are  in  the  possession  of  the 
Jews.  And  even  if  they  were,  there  is  no  possibility  of 
proving  the  handwriting  in  either  case.  At  the  time 
those  books  were  written  there  was  no  printing,  and  con- 
sequently there  could  be  no  publication,  otherwise  than 
by  written  copies,  which  any  man  might  make  or  alter 
at  pleasure,  and  call  them  originals.  *  Can  we  suppose  it 

*  The  former  part  of  the  Age  of  Reason  has  not  been  published  two  years,  and  there 
is  already  an  expression  in  it  that  is  not  mine.  The  expression  is,  TTte  book  of  Luke 
was  carried  by  a  majority  of  one  voice  only .  It  may  be  true,  but  it  is  not  I  that  have 
said  it.  Some  person,  who  might  know  of  the  circumstance,  has  added  it  in  a  note  at 
the  bottom  of  the  page  of  some  of  the  editions,  printed  either  in  England  or  in  Amer- 
ica; and  the  printers,  after  that,  have  placed  it  into  the  body  of  the  work,  and  made 
me  the  author  of  it.  If  this  has  happened  within  such  a  short  space  of  time,  notwith- 
standing the  aid  of  printing,  which  prevents  the  alteration  of  copies  individually,  what 
may  not  have  happened  in  a  much  greater  length  of  time,  when  there  was  no  printing. 
and  when  any  man  who  could  write  could  make  a  written  copy,  and  call  it  an  originat 
by  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  or  John  ? 


AGE  OF  REASON.  163 

is  consistent  with  the  wisdom  of  the  Almighty,  to  com- 
mit himself  and  his  will  to  man  npon  such  precarious 
means  as  these,  or  that  it  is  consistent  we  should  pin  our 
faith  upon  such  uucertainties?  We  cannot  make,  nor 
alter,  nor  even  imitate  so  much  as  one  blade  of  grass  that 
he  has  made,  and  yet  we  can  make  or  alter  words  of 
God.  as  easily  as  words  of  man. 

About  three  hundred  and  fifty  years  after  the  time  that 
Christ  is  said  to  have  lived,  several  writings  of  the  kind  1 
am  speaking  of  were  scattered  in  the  hands  of  divers  in- 
dividuals ;  and  as  the  church  had  began  to  form  itself 
into  a  hierarchy,  or  church  government,  with  temporal 
powers,  it  set  itself  about  collecting  them  into  a  code,  as 
we  now  see  them,  called  The  New  Testament.  They  de- 
cided by  vote,  as  I  have  before  said  in  the  former  part  of 
the  Age  of  Reason^  which  of  those  writings,  out  of  the 
collection  they  had  made,  should  be  the  word  of  God^ 
and  which  should  not.  The  Rabbins  of  the  Jews  had  de- 
cided, by  vote,  upon  the  books  of  the  Bible  before. 

As  the  object  of  the  church,  as  is  the  case  in  all 
national  establishments  of  churches,  was  power  and  rev- 
enue, and  terror  the  means  it  used,  it  is  consistent  to 
suppose  that  the  most  miraculous  and  wonderful  of  the 
writings  they  had  collected  stood  the  best  chance  of  being 
voted.  And  as  to  the  authenticity  of  the  books,  the  vote 
stands  in  the  place  of  it.,  for  it  can  be  traced  no  higher. 

Disputes,  however,  ran  high  among  the  people  then 
calling  themselves  Christians  ;  not  only  as  to  points  of 
doctrine,  but  as  to  the  authenticity  of  the  books.  In  the 
contest  between  the  persons  called  St,  Augustine  and 
Fauste,  about  the  year  400,  the  latter  says  :  "  The  books 
called  the  Evangelists  have  been  composed  long  after  the 
times  of  the  apostles  by  some  obscure  men,  who,  fearing 
that  the  world  would  not  give  credit  to  their  relation  of 
matters  of  which  they  could  not  be  informed,  have  pub- 
lished them  under  the  names  of  the  apostles,  aid  wliich 


164  AGE  OF   REASON. 

are  so  full  of  sottishness  and  discordant  relations,  that 
there  is  neither  agreement  nor  connection  between  them." 

And  in  another  place,  addressing  himself  to  the  advo- 
cates of  those  books,  as  being  the  word  of  God,  he  says, 
**Itis  thus  that  your  predecessors  have  inserted  in  the 
scriptures  of  our  Lord  many  things,  which,  though  they 
carry  his  name  agrees  not  with  his  doctrines.  This  is  not 
surprising,  since  that  we  have  often  proved  that  these 
things  have  not  been  written  by  himself,  nor  by  his 
apostles,  but  that  for  the  greater  part  they  are  founded 
upon  tales^  upon  vague  reports^  and  put  together  by  I 
know  not  what,  half-Jews,  but  with  little  agreement  be- 
tween them,  and  which  they  have  nevertheless  published 
under  the  names  of  the  apostles  of  our  Lord,  and  have 
thus  attributed  to  them  their  own  errors  and  their  lies.'' ''^ 

The  reader  will  see  by  these  extracts,  that  the  authen- 
ticity of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  was  denied, 
and  the  books  treated  as  tales,  forgeries,  and  lies,  at  the 
time  they  v/ere  voted  to  be  the  word  of  God.f  But  the 
interest  of  the  church,   with  the  assistance  of  the  fagot, 

*  I  have  these  two  extracts  from  Boulanger's  Life  of  Paul,  written  in  French.  Bou- 
langer  has  quoted  them  from  the  writings  of  Augustine  against  Fauste,  to  which  he 
refers. 

t  Boulanger,  in  his  Life  of  Piiul  \\3S  collected  from  the  ecclesiastical  histories,  and 
from  the  writings  of  the  fathers,  as  they  are  called,  several  matters  which  show  the- 
opinions  that  prevailed  among  the  different  sects  of  Christians  at  the  time  the  Testa- 
ment, as  we  now  see  it,  was  voted  to  be  the  word  of  God.  The  following  extracts  are 
from  the  second  chapter  of  that  work. 

"  The  iMarcionists,  (a  Christian  sect,)  assumed  that  the  evangelists  were  filled  with 
falsities  The  Manicheans.  who  formed  a  very  numerous  sect  at  the  commencement 
of  Christianity,  rejected  as  false  all  ike  New  Testament,  and  showed  other  writings, 
quite  different  that  thay  gave  for  authentic.  The  Cerinthians,  like  the  Marcionists, 
admitted  not  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  The  Encratites,  and  the  Severians.  adopted 
neither  the  Acts  nor  the  Epistles  of  Paul.  Chrysostom,  in  a  homily  which  he  made 
upon  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  says  that  in  his  time,  about  the  year  400,  many  people 
knew  nothing  either  of  the  author  or  of  the  book.  St.  Irene,  who  lived  before  that 
time,  reports  that  the  Valentinians,  like  several  other  sects  of  Christians,  accused 
the  scriptures  of  being  filled  with  imperfections  errors,  and  contradictions.  The- 
Ebionites,  or  Nazarines.  who  were  the  first  Christians  rejected  all  the  Epistles  of 
Paul  and  regarded  him  as  an  impostor.  They  report,  among  other  things,  that  he  was 
originally  a  pagan,  that  he  came  to  Jerusalem,  where  he  lived  some  time:  and  that 
having  a  mind  to  marry  the  dauehter  of  the  high  priest,  he  caused  himself  10  be  cir- 
cumcised ;  but  that  not  being  able  to  obtain  her  he  quarreled  with  the  Jews  and  wrote- 
xgainst  circumcision,  and  ag«inst  the  observance  of  the  sabbath,  and  against  «11  the- 
legal  ordinances. 


AGE  OF   REASON.  1 65 

bore  down  the  opposition,  and  at  last  suppressed  all  in- 
vestigation. Miracles  followed  upon  miracles,  if  we  will 
believe  them,  and  men  were  taught  to  say  they  believed 
whether  they  believed  or  not.  But  (by  way  of  throwing 
in  a  thought)  the  French  Rev^olution  has  excommuni- 
cated the  church  from  the  power  of  working  miracles  ; 
she  has  not  been  able,  with  the  assistance  of  all  her 
saints,  to  work  one  miracle  since  the  revolution  began ; 
and  as  she  never  stood  in  greater  need  than  now,  we 
may,  without  the  aid  of  divination,  conclude  that  all  her 
fonner  miracles  were  tricks  and  lies. 

When  we  consider  the  lapse  of  more  than  three  hun- 
dred years  intervening  between  the  time  that  Christ  is 
said  to  have  lived  and  the  time  the  New  Testament  was 
formed  into  a  book,  we  must  see,  even  without  the  assist- 
ance of  historical  evidence,  the  exceeding  uncertainty 
there  is  of  its  authenticity.  The  authenticity  of  the  book 
of  Homer,  so  far  as  regards  the  authorship,  is  much  bet- 
ter established  than  that  of  the  New  Testament,  though 
Homer  is  a  thousand  years  the  most  ancient.  It  is  only 
an  exceedingly  good  poet  that  could  have  written  the 
book  of  Homer,  and  therefore  few  men  only  could  have 
attempted  it  ;  and  a  man  capable  of  doing  it  would  not 
have  thrown  away  his  own  fame  by  giving  it  to  another. 
In  like  manner,  there  were  but  few  that  could  have  com- 
posed Euclid's  Elements,  because  none  but  an  exceedingly 
good  geometrician  could  have  been  the  authorof  that  work. 

But  with  respect  to  the  books  of  the  New  Testament, 
particularly  such  parts  as  tell  us  of  the  resurrection  and  as- 
cension of  Christ,  any  person  who  could  tell  a  story  of  an 
apparition,  or  of  a  marC  s.  walkings  could  have  made  such 
books  ;  for  the  story  is  most  wretchedly  told.  The  chance, 
therefore,  of  forgery  in  the  Testament,  is  millions  to  one 
greater  than  in  the  case  of  Homer  or  Euclid.  Of  the 
numerous  priests  or  parsons  of  the  present  day,  bishops 
and  all,  every  one  of  them  can  make  a  sermon,  or  trans- 


l66  AGE  OF   REASON. 

late  a  scrap  of  Latin,  especially  if  it  had  been  translated  a 
thousand  times  before  ;  but  is  there  any  among  them 
that  can  write  poetry  like  Homer,  or  science  like  Euclid  ? 
The  sum  total  of  a  person's  learning,  with  very  few  ex- 
ceptions, is  a  bab^  and  hie  lies c^  hoc ;  and  their  knowledge 
of  science  is  three  times  one  is  three  ;  and  this  is  more 
than  sufficient  to  have  enabled  them,  had  they  lived  at  the 
time,  to  have  written  all  the  books  of  the  New  Testament. 

As  the  opportunities  of  forgeries  were  greater,  so  also 
was  the  inducement.  A  man  could  gain  no  advantage  by 
writing  under  the  name  of  Homer  or  Euclid  ;  if  he  could 
write  equal  to  them,  it  would  be  better  that  he  wrote 
under  his  own  name  ;  if  inferior,  he  could  not  succeed. 
Pride  would  prevent  the  former,  and  impossibility  the 
latter.  But  with  respect  to  such  books  as  compose  the 
New  Testament,  all  the  inducements  were  on  the  side  of 
forgery.  The  best  imagined  history  that  could  have  been 
made,  at  the  distance  of  two  or  three  hundred  years  after 
the  time,  could  not  have  passed  for  an  original  under  the 
name  of  the  real  writer  ;  the  only  chance  of  success  lay 
in  forgery,  for  the  church  wanted  pretence  for  its  new 
doctrine,  and  truth  and  talents  were  out  of  the  question. 

But  as  is  not  uncommon  (as  before  observed)  to  relate 
stories  of  persons  walking  after  they  are  dead,  and  of 
ghosts  and  apparitions  of  such  as  have  fallen  by  some 
violent  or  extraordinary  meams;  and  as  the  people  of  that 
day  were  in  the  habit  of  believing  such  things,  and  of  the 
appearance  of  angels,  and  also  of  devils,  and  of  their  get- 
ting into  people's  insides  and  shaking  them  like  a  fit  of 
an  ague,  and  of  their  being  cast  out  again  as  if  by  an 
emetic — (Mary  Magdalene,  the  book  of  IVIark  tells  us, 
has  brought  up,  or  been  brought  to  bed  of  seven  devils) 
— it  was  nothing  extraordinary  that  some  story  of  this 
kind  should  get  abroad  of  the  person  called  Jesus  Christ, 
and  become  afterward  the  foundation  of  the  four  books 
ascribed  to  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and  John.     Each  writer 


AG8   OF   REASON.  167 

told  the  tale  as  he  heard  it,  or  thereabouts,  and  gave  to 
his  book  the  name  of  the  saint  or  the  apostle  whom  tra- 
dition had  given  as  the  eye-witness.  It  is  only  upon  this 
ground  that  the  contradiction  in  those  books  can  be  ac- 
counted for  ;  and  if  this  be  not  the  case,  they  are  down- 
right impositions,  lies  and  forgeries,  without  "even  the 
apology  of  credulity. 

That  they  have  been  written  by  a  sort  of  half  Jews,  as 
the  foregoing  quotations  mention,  is  discernable  enough. 
The  frequent  references  made  to  that  chief  assassin  and 
impostor,  Moses,  and  to  the  men  called  prophets,  estab- 
lish this  point ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the  church  has 
complemented  the  fraud  by  admitting  the  Bible  and  the 
Testament  to  reply  to  each  other.  Between  the  Chris- 
tian Jew  and  the  Christian  Gentile,  the  thing  called  a 
prophecy  and  the  thing  prophesied,  the  type  and  the 
thing  typified,  the  sign  and  the  thing  signified,  have  been 
industriously  rummaged  up  and  fitted  together,  like  old 
locks  and  pick-lock  keys.  The  story  foolishly  enough 
told  of  Eve  and  the  serpent,  and  naturally  enough  as  to 
the  enmity  between  men  and  serpents  (for  the  serpent 
always  bites  about  the  heel^  because  it  cannot  reach 
higher  ;  and  the  man  always  knocks  the  serpent  about 
the  head^  as  the  most  effectual  way  to  prevent  its  biting*) 
this  foolish  story,  I  say,  has  been  made  into  a  prophecy, 
a  type,  and  a  promise  to  begin  with  ;  and  the  lying  im- 
position of  Isaiah  to  Ahaz,  That  a  virgin  shall  conceive 
and  bear  a  son^  as  a  sigii  that  Ahaz  should  conquer, 
when  the  event  was  that  he  was  defeated  (as  already 
noticed  in  the  observations  on  the  book  of  Isaiah),  has 
been  perverted  and  made  to  serve  as  a  winder  up. 

Jonah  and  the  whale  are  also  made  into  a  sign  or  a 
type.  Jonah  is  Jesus,  and  the  whale  is  the  grave  ;  for  it 
is  said  (and  they  have  made  Christ  to  say  it  of  himself), 
Matt.  chap,  xii,  ver.  40,   "  For  as  Jonah  was  three  days 

*  It  ahall  bruice  thy  head  and  thou  shalt  bruise  his  hfel.    Genesis,  chap,  iii,  verse  15. 


l68  AGE   OF   REASON. 

and  three  nights  in  the  whale's  belly,  so  shall  the  Son  of 
Man  be  three  days  and  three  nights  in  the  heart  of  the 
earth."  But  it  happens,  awkwardly  enough,  that  Christ, 
according  to  their  own  account,  was  but  one  day  and  two 
nights  in  the  grave  ;  about  36  hours,  instead  of  72  ;  that 
is,  the  Friday  night,  the  Saturday,  and  the  Saturday  night ; 
for  they  say  he  was  up  on  the  Sunday  morning  by  sunrise, 
or  before.  But  as  this  fits  quite  as  well  as  the  bite  and 
the  kick  in  Genesis,  or  the  virgin  and  her  son  in  Isaiah, 
it  will  pass  in  the  lump  of  orthodox  things.  Thus  much 
for  the  historical  part  of  the  Testament  and  its  evidences. 

Epistles  of  Paul. — The  epistles  ascribed  to  Paul,  being 
fourteen  in  number,  almost  fill  up  the  remaining  part  of 
the  Testament.  Whether  those  epistles  were  written  by 
the  person  to  whom  they  are  ascribed  is  a  matter  of  no 
great  importance,  since  the  writer,  whoever  he  was,  at- 
tempts to  prove  his  doctrine  by  argument.  He  does  not 
pretend  to  have  been  witness  to  any  of  the  scenes  told  of 
the  lesurrection  and  the  ascension,  and  he  declares  that 
he  had  not  believed  them. 

The  story  of  his  being  struck  to  the  ground  as  he  was 
journeying  to  Damascus  has  nothing  in  it  miraculous  or 
extraordinary  ;  he  escaped  with  life,  and  that  is  more  than 
many  others  have  done,  who  have  been  struck  with  light- 
ning ;  and  that  he  should  lose  his  sight  for  three  days, 
and  be  unable  to  eat  or  drink  during  that  time,  is  nothing 
more  than  is  common  in  such  conditions.  His  com- 
panions that  were  with  him  appear  not  to  have  suffered 
in  the  same  manner,  for  they  were  well  enough  to  lead 
him  the  remainder  of  the  journey  ;  neither  did  they  pre- 
tend to  have  seen  any  vision. 

The  character  of  the  person  called  Paul,  according  to 
the  accounts  given  of  him,  has  in  it  a  great  deal  of  vio- 
lence and  fanaticism  ;  he  had  persecuted  with  as  much 
heat  as  he  preached  afterward  ;  the  stroke  he  had  re- 
ceived had  changed  his  thinking,   without  altering  his 


AGE  OF   REASON.  169 

constitution  ;  and  either  as  a  Jew  or  a  Christian,  he  was 
the  same  zealot.  Such  men  are  never  good  moral  e\'i- 
dences  of  any  doctrine  they  preach.  They  are  always  in 
extremes,  as  well  of  actions  as  of  belief. 

The  doctrine  he  sets  out  to  prove  by  argument  is  the 
resurrection  of  the  same  body,  and  he  advances  this  as  an 
evidence  of  immortality.  But  so  much  will  men  diflfer 
in  their  manner  of  thinking,  and  in  the  conclusions  they 
draw  from  the  same  premises,  that  this  doctrine  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  same  body,  so  far  from  being  an  evi- 
dence of  immortality,  appears  to  me  to  furnish  an  evidence 
against  it ;  for  if  I  have  already  died  in  this  body,  and  am 
raised  again  in  the  same  body  in  which  I  have  lived,  it  is 
a  presumptive  evidence  that  I  shall  die  again.  That 
resurrection  no  more  secures  me  against  the  repetition  of 
dying,  than  an  ague-fit,  when  passed,  secures  me  against 
another.  To  believe,  therefore,  in  immortality,  I  must 
have  a  more  elevated  idea  than  is  contained  in  the  gloomy 
doctrine  of  the  resurrection. 

Besides,  as  a  matter  of  choice,  as  well  as  of  hope,  I  had 
rather  have  a  better  body  and  a  more  convenient  form 
than  the  present.  Every  animal  in  the  creation  excels 
us  in  something.  The  winged  insects,  without  mention- 
ing doves  or  eagles,  can  pass  over  more  space  and  with 
greater  ease  in  a  few  minutes  than  man  can  in  an  hour. 
The  glide  of  the  smallest  fish,  in  proportion  to  its  bulk, 
exceeds  us  in  motion  almost  beyond  comparison,  and 
without  weariness.  Even  the  sluggish  snail  can  as- 
cend from  the  bottom  of  a  dungeon,  where  a  man,  by  the 
want  of  that  ability,  would  perish  ;  and  a  spider  can 
launch  itself  from  the  top,  as  a  playful  amusement.  The 
personal  powers  of  man  arj  so  limited,  and  his  heavy 
frame  so  little  constructed  to  extensive  enjoyment,  that 
there  is  nothing  to  induce  us  to  wish  the  opinion  of  Paul 
to  be  true.  It  is  too  little  for  the  magnitude  of  the  scene 
—  too  mean  for  the  sublimity  of  the  subject. 


170  AGE   OF   REASON. 

But  all  other  argumeuts  apart,  the  consciousness  of  ex- 
istence is  the  only  conceivable  idea  we  can  have  of 
another  life,  and  the  continuance  of  that  consciousness  is 
immortality.  The  consciousness  of  existence,  or  the 
knowing  that  we  exist,  is  not  necessarily  confined  to  the 
same  form,  nor  to  the  same  matter,  even  in  this  life. 

We  have  not  in  all  cases  the  same  form,  nor  in  any  case 
the  same  matter  that  composed  our  bodies  twenty  or 
thirty  years  ago  ;  and  yet  we  are  conscious  of  being  the 
same  persons.  Even  legs  and  arms,  which  make  up 
almost  half  the  human  frame,  are  not  necessary  to  the  con- 
sciousness of  existence.  These  may  be  lost  or  taken  away, 
and  the  full  consciousness  of  existence  remain  ;  and  were 
their  place  supplied  by  wings,  or  other  appendages,  we  can- 
not conceive  that  it  would  alter  our  consciousness  of  ex- 
istence. In  short,  we  know  not  how  much,  or  rather  how 
little,  of  our  composition  it  is,  and  how  exquisitely  fine  that 
little  is,  that  creates  in  us  this  consciousness  of  existence  ; 
and  all  beyond  that  is  like  the  pulp  of  a  peach,  distinct  and 
separate  from  the  vegetative  speck  in   the  kernel. 

Who  can  say  by  what  exceedingly  fine  action  of  fine 
matter  it  is  that  a  thought  is  produced  in  what  we  call 
the  mind?  and  yet  that  thought  when  produced,  as  I 
now  produce  the  thought  I  am  writing,  is  capable  of  be- 
coming immortal,  and  is  the  only  production  of  man  that 
has  that  capacity. 

Statues  of  brass  or  marble  will  perish  ;  and  statues 
made  in  imitation  of  them  are  not  the  same  statues,  nor 
the  same  workmanship,  any  more  than  the  copy  of  a  pic- 
ture is  the  same  picture.  But  print  and  reprint  a  thought 
a  thousand  times  over,  and  that  with  materials  of  any 
kind — carve  it  in  wood  or  engrave  it  on  stone,  the 
thought  is  eternally  and  identically  the  same  thought  in 
every  case.  It  has  a  capacity  of  unimpaired  existence, 
unaflfected  by  change  of  matter,  and  is  essentially  dis- 
tinct and  of  a  nature  different  from  every  thing  else  that 


AGE  OF  REASON.  171 

we  know  or  can  conceive.  If,  then,  the  thing  produced 
has  in  itself  a  capacity  of  being  immortal,  it  is  more  than 
a  token  that  the  power  that  produced  it,  which  is  the  self- 
same thing  as  consciousness  of  existence,  can  be  immortal 
also  ;  and  that  as  independently  of  the  matter  it  was  first 
connected  with,  as  the  thought  is  of  the  printingor  writing 
it  first  appeared  in.  The  one  idea  is  not  more  difficult  to 
believe  than  the  other,  and  we  can  see  that  one  is  true. 

That  the  consciousness  of  existence  is  not  dependent 
on  the  same  form  or  the  same  matter  is  demonstrated  to 
our  senses  in  the  works  of  the  creation,  as  far  as  our  senses 
are  capable  of  receiving  that  demonstration.  A  very 
numerous  part  of  the  animal  creation  preaches  to  us,  far 
better  that  Paul,  the  belief  of  a  life  hereafter.  Their 
little  life  resembles  an  earth  and  a  heaven  —  a  present 
and  a  future  state,  and  comprises,  if  it  may  be  so  express- 
ed, immortality  in  miniature. 

The  most  beautiful  parts  of  the  creation  to  our  eye  are 
the  winged  insects,  and  they  are  not  so  originally.  They 
acquire  that  fonn  and  that  inimitable  brilliancy  by  pro- 
gressive changes.  The  slow  and  creeping  caterpillar- worm 
of  to-day  passes  in  a  few  days  to  a  torpid  figure  and  a 
state  resembling  death  ;  and  in  the  next  change  comes 
forth  in  all  the  miniature  magnificence  of  life,  a  splendid 
butterfly.  No  resemblance  of  the  former  creature  re- 
mains ;  ever\'thing  is  changed  ;  all  his  powers  are  new, 
and  life  is  to  him  another  thing.  We  cannot  conceive 
that  the  consciousness  of  existence  is  not  the  same  in 
this  state  of  the  animal  as  before  ;  why  then  must  I  be- 
lieve that  the  resurrection  of  the  same  body  is  necessary 
to  continue  to  me  the  consciousness  of  existence  hereafter  ? 

In  the  former  part  of  the  Age  of  Reason  I  have  called 
the  creation  the  only  true  and  real  word  of  God  ;  and 
this  instance,  or  this  text,  in  the  book  of  creation,  not 
only  shows  to  us  that  this  thing  may  be  so,  but  that  it 
is  so :  and  that  the  belief  of  a  future  state  is  a  rational 


172  AGE    OF    REASON, 

belief,  founded  upon  facts  visible  in  the  creation  ;  for  it 
is  not  more  difficult  to  believe  that  we  shall  exist  here- 
after in  a  better  state  and  form  than  at  present,  than  that 
a  worm  should  become  a  butterfly,  and  quit  the  dunghill 
for  the  atmosphere,  if  we  did  not  know  it  as  a  fact. 

As  to  the  doubtful  jargon  ascribed  to  Paul  in  the  15th 
chapter  of  I.  Corinthians,  which  makes  part  of  the  burial 
service  of  some  Christian  sectaries,  it  is  as  destitute  of 
meaning  as  the  tolling  of  a  bell  at  a  funeral  ;  it  explains 
nothing  to  the  understanding — it  illustrates  nothing  to 
the  imagination,  but  leaves  the  reader  to  find  any  mean- 
ing if  he  can.  "  All  flesh  (says  he)  is  not  the  same  flesh. 
There  is  one  flesh  of  men  ;  another  of  beast  ;  another  of 
fishes  ;  and  another  of  birds."  And  what  then  ? — noth- 
ing. A  cook  could  have  said  as  much.  "  There  are  also 
(says  he)  bodies  celestial,  and  bodies  terrestrial  ;  the  glory 
of  the  celestial  is  one,  and  the  glory  of  the  terrestrial  is 
another."  And  what  then? — nothing.  And  what  is 
the  difference?  nothing  that  he  has  told.  "  There  is 
(says  he)  one  glory  of  the  sun,  and  another  glory  of  the 
moon,  and  another  glory  of  the  stars. ' '  And  what  then  ? 
— nothing  ;  except  that  he  says  that  one  star  differeth 
from  another  star  in  glory ^  instead  of  distance  ;  and  he 
might  as  well  have  told  us  that  the  moon  did  not  shine 
so  bright  as  the  sun.  All  this  is  nothing  better  than  the 
jargon  of  a  conjuror,  who  picks  up  phrases  he  does  not 
understand,  to  confound  the  credulous  people  who  have 
come  to  have  their  fortunes  told.  Priests  and  conjurors 
are  of  the  same  trade. 

Sometimes  Paul  affects  to  be  a  naturalist  and  to  prove 
his  system  of  resurrection  from  the  principles  of  vege- 
tation. "  Thou  fool,  (says  he),  that  which  thou  sowest  is 
not  quickened,  except  it  die."  To  which  one  might 
reply  in  his  own  language  and  say,  ''Thou  fool,  Paul, 
that  which  thou  sowest  is  not  quickened,  except  it  die 
not;  for  the  grain  that  dies  in  the  ground  never  does,  nor 


AGE  OF   REASON.  1 73 

can  vegetate.  It  is  only  the  living  grains  that  produce 
the  next  crop."  But  the  metaphor,  in  any  point  of 
view,  is  no  simile.   It  is  succession,  and  not  resurrection. 

The  progress  of  an  animal  from  one  state  of  being  to 
another,  as  from  a  worm  to  a  butterfly,  applies  to  the 
case  ;  but  this  of  a  grain  does  not,  and  shows  Paul  to  have 
been  what  he  says  of  others,  a  fool. 

Whether  the  fourteen  epistles  ascribed  to  Paul  were 
written  by  him  or  not,  is  a  matter  of  indiflference  ;  they 
are  either  argumentative  or  dogmatical  ;  and  as  the  argu- 
ment is  defective  and  the  dogmatical  part  is  merel)'  pre- 
sumpti\e,  it  signifies  not  who  wrote  them.  And  the 
same  may  be  said  for  the  remaining  parts  of  the  Testa- 
ment. It  is  not  upon  the  epistles,  but  upon  what  is 
called  the  Gospel,  contained  in  the  four  books  ascribed 
to  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and  John,  and  upon  the  pre- 
tended prophecies,  that  the  theory  of  the  church  calling 
itsell  the  Christian  Church  is  founded.  The  epistles  are 
dependent  upon  those,  and  must  follow  their  fate  ;  for  if 
the  story  of  Jesus  Christ  be  fabulous,  all  reasoning 
founded  upon  it  as  a  supposed  truth  must  fall  with  it. 

We  know  from  history  that  one  of  the  principal  leaders 
of  this  church,  Athanasius,  lived  at  the  time  the  New 
Testament  was  formed  ;  *  and  we  know  also,  from  the 
absurd  jargon  he  left  us  under  the  name  of  a  creed,  the 
character  of  the  men  who  fonned  the  New  Testament ; 
and  we  know  also  from  the  same  history  that  the  authen- 
ticity of  the  books  of  which  it  is  composed  was  denied  at 
the  time.  It  was  upon  the  vote  of  such  as  Athanasius, 
that  the  Testament  was  decreed  to  be  the  word  of  God; 
and  nothing  can  present  to  us  a  more  strange  idea  than 
that  of  decreeing  the  word  of  God  by  vote.  Those  who 
rest  their  faith  upon  such  authority  put  man  in  the  place 
of  God,  and  have  no  foundation  for  future  happiness  ; 
credulity,  however,  is  not  a  crime,  but  it  becomes  criminal 

*  AthanasiuB  died,  according  to  the  Church  chronology,  in  the  year  371. 


174  AGE   OF   REASON. 

by  resisting  conviction.  It  is  strangling  in  the  womb 
of  the  conscience  the  efforts  it  makes  to  ascertain  truth. 
We  should  never  force  belief  upon  ourselves  in  anything. 

I  here  close  the  subject  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the 
New.  The  evidence  I  have  produced  to  prove  them  for- 
geries is  extracted  from  the  books  themselves,  and  acts, 
like  a  two-edged  sword,  either  way.  If  the  evidence  be 
denied,  the  authenticity  of  the  scriptures  is  denied  with 
it ;  for  it  is  scripture  evidence  ;  and  if  the  evidence  be 
admitted,  the  authenticity  of  the  books  is  disproved. 
The  contradictory  impossibilities  contained  in  the  Old 
Testament  and  the  New,  put  them  in  the  case  of  a  man 
who  swears  for  and  against.  Either  evidence  convicts 
him  of  perjury,  and  equally  destroys  reputation. 

Should  the  Bible  and  the  New  Testament  hereafter  fall, 
it  is  not  I  that  have  been  the  occasion.  I  have  done  no 
more  than  extracted  the  evidence  from  the  confused 
mass  of  matter  with  which  it  is  mixed,  and  arranged 
that  evidence  in  a  point  of  light  to  be  clearly  seen  and 
easily  comprehended  ;  and,  having  done  this,  I  leave  the 
reader  to  judge  for  himself,  as  I  have  judged  for  myself. 


CONCLUSION. 

In  the  former  part  of  the  Age  of  Reason  I  have  spoken 
of  the  three  frauds,  mystery^  miracle^  sm^  prophecy ;  and 
as  I  have  seen  nothing  in  any  of  the  answers  to  that  work 
that  in  the  least  affects  what  I  have  there  said  upon  those 
subjects,  I  shall  not  encumber  this  Second  Part  with  ad- 
ditions that  are  not  necessary. 

I  have  spoken  also  in  the  same  work  upon  what  is 
called  revelation^  and  have  shown  the  absurd  misappli- 
cation of  that  term  to  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  and 
the  New  ;  for  certainly  revelation  is  out  of  the  question 
in  reciting  anything  of  which  man  has  been  the  actor  or 


AGE   OF   RKASON.  1 75 

the  witness.  Tliat  which  a  man  has  done  or  seen,  needs 
no  revelation  to  tell  him  he  had  done  it  or  seen  it,  for  he 
knows  it  already  ;  nor  to  enable  him  to  tell  it  or  to  write 
it.  It  is  ignorance  or  imposition  to  apply  the  term  re- 
velation in  such  cases  :  yet  the  Bible  and  Testament  are 
classed  under  this  fraudulent  description  of  being  all 
revelation. 

Revelation  then,  so  far  as  the  term  has  relation  be- 
tween God  and  man,  can  only  be  applied  to  something 
which  God  reveals  of  his  will  to  man  ;  but  though  the 
power  of  the  Almighty  to  make  such  a  communication  is 
necessarily  admitted,  because  to  that  power  all  things 
are  possible,  yet  the  thing  so  revealed  (if  anything  ever 
was  revealed,  and  which,  bye  the  bye,  it  is  impossible  to 
prove ),  is  revelation  to  the  person  only  to  whom  it  is  made. 
His  account  of  it  to  another  person  is  not  revelation  ;  and 
whoever  puts  faith  in  that  account,  puts  it  in  the  man 
from  whom  the  account  comes  ;  and  that  man  may  have 
been  deceived,  or  may  have  dreamed  it,  or  he  may  be  an 
impostor  and  may  lie.  There  is  no  possible  criterion 
whereby  to  judge  of  the  truth  of  what  he  tells,  for  even 
the  morality  of  it  would  be  no  proof  of  revelation.  In 
all  such  cases  the  proper  answer  would  be,  "  When  it  is 
revealed  to  w^,  /  will  believe  it  to  be  a  revelation  ;  but  it 
is  not.,  and  cannot  be  incumbent  upon  me  to  believe  it  to 
be  revelation  before ;  neither  is  it  proper  that  I  should 
take  the  word  of  a  man  as  the  word  of  God.,  and  put  man 
in  the  place  of  God.''''  This  is  the  manner  in  which  I 
have  spoken  of  revelation  in  the  former  part  of  the  Age 
of  Reason ;  and  which,  while  it  reverentially  admits  re- 
velation as  a  possible  thing,  because,  as  before  said,  to 
the  Almighty  all  things  are  possible,  it  prevents  the  im- 
position of  one  man  upon  another,  and  precludes  the 
wicked  use  of  pretended  revelation. 

But  though,  speaking  for  myself,  I  thus  admit  the  pos- 
sibility of  revelation,   I  totally  disbelieve   that  the  Al- 


176  AGE   OF    REASON. 

mighty  ever  did  communicate  anything  to  man,  by  any 
mode  of  speech,  in  any  language,  or  by  any  kind  of 
vision,  or  appearance,  or  by  any  means  which  our  senses 
are  capable  of  receiving,  otherwise  than  by  the  universal 
display  of  himself  in  the  works  of  the  creation,  and  by  that 
repugnance  we  feel  in  ourselves  to  bad  actions,  and  the 
disposition  to  do  good  ones. 

The  most  detestable  wickedness,  the  most  horrid  cruel- 
ties, and  the  greatest  miseries  that  have  afflicted  the 
human  race  have  had  their  origin  in  this  thing  called 
revelation,  or  revealed  religion.  It  has  been  the  most 
dishonorable  belief  against  the  character  of  the  Divinity, 
the  most  destructive  to  morality  and  the  peace  and  hap- 
piness of  man,  that  ever  was  propagated  since  man  began 
to  exist.  It  is  better,  far  better,  that  we  admitted,  if  it 
were  possible,  a  thousand  devils  to  roam  at  large,  and  to 
preach  publicly  the  doctrine  of  devils,  if  there  were  any 
such,  than  that  we  permitted  one  such  impostor  and 
monster  as  Mcses,  Joshua,  Samuel,  and  the  Bible 
prophets,  to  come  with  the  pretended  word  of  God  in  his 
mouth,  and  have  credit  among  us. 

Whence  arose  all  the  horrid  assassinations  of  whole  na- 
tions of  men,  women,  and  infants,  with  which  the  Bible  is 
filled,  and  the  bloody  persecutions  and  tortures  unto 
death,  and  religious  wars,  that  since  that  time  have  laid 
Europe  in  blood  and  ashes — whence  rose  they  but  from 
this  impious  thing  called  revealed  religion,  and  this 
monstrous  belief  that  God  has  spoken  to  man?  The  lies 
of  the  Bible  have  been  the  cause  of  the  one,  and  the  lies 
of  the  Testament  01  the  other. 

Some  Christians  pretend  that  Christianity  was  not  es- 
tablished by  the  sword  ;  but  of  what  period  of  time  do 
they  speak?  It  was  impossible  that  twelve  men  could 
begin  with  the  sword  ;  they  had  not  the  power  ;  but  no 
sooner  were  the  professors  of  Christianity  sufficiently 
powerful  to  employ  the  sword,  than  they  did  so,  and  the 


AGE  OF   REASON.  177 

Stake  and  fagot,  too  ;  and  Mahomet  could  not  do  it  sooner. 
By  the  same  spirit  that  Peter  cut  off  the  ear  of  the  high 
priest's  servant  (if  the  story  be  true),  he  would  have  cut 
off  his  head,  and  the  head  of  his  master,  had  he  been 
able.  Besides  this,  Christianity  grounds  itself  originally 
upon  the  Bible,  and  the  Bible  was  established  altogether 
by  the  sword,  and  that  in  the  worst  use  of  it — not  to 
terrify,  but  to  extirpate.  The  Jews  made  no  converts  ; 
they  butchered  all.  The  Bible  is  the  sire  of  the  Testa- 
ment, and  both  are  called  the  word  of  God.  The  Chris- 
tians read  both  books ;  the  ministers  preach  from  both 
books  ;  and  this  thing  called  Christianity  is  made  up  of 
both.  It  is  then  false  to  say  that  Christianity  was  not  es- 
tablished by  the  sword. 

The  only  sect  that  has  not  persecuted  are  the  Quakers  ; 
and  the  only  reason  that  can  be  given  for  it  is,  that  they 
are  rather  Deists  than  Christians.  They  do  not  believe 
much  about  Jesus  Christ,  and  they  call  the  scriptures  a 
dead  letter.  Had  they  called  them  by  a  worse  name,  they 
had  been  nearer  the  truth. 

It  is  incumbent  on  every  man  who  reverences  the  char- 
acter of  the  Creator,  and  who  wishes  to  lessen  the 
catalogue  of  artificial  miseries,  and  remove  the  cause  that 
has  sown  persecutions  thick  among  mankind,  to  expel  all 
ideasof  revealed  religion,  as  a  dangerous  heresy  and  an 
impious  fraud.  What  is  that  we  have  learned  from  this 
pretended  thing  called  revealed  religion  ?  Nothing  that  is 
useful  to  man,  and  everything  that  is  dishonorable  to  his 
maker.  What  is  it  the  Bible  teaches  us?  —  rapine, 
cruelty,  and  murder.  What  is  it  the  Testament  teaches 
us? — to  believe  that  the  Almighty  committed  debauch- 
ery with  a  woman  engaged  to  be  married,  and  the  be- 
lief of  this  debauchery  is  called  faith. 

As  to  the  fragments  of  morality  that  are  irregularly 
and  thinly  scattered  in  these  books,  they  make  no  part 
of  this  pretended  thing,  revealed  religion.    They  are  the 


178  AGE   OF   reason: 

natural  dictates  of  conscience,  and  the  bonds  by  which 
society  is  held  together,  and  without  which  it  cannot 
exist,  and  are  nearly  the  same  in  all  religions  and  in  all 
societies.  The  Testament  teaches  nothing  new  upon 
this  subject,  and  where  it  attempts  to  exceed,  it  becomes 
mean  and  ridiculous.  The  doctrine  of  not  retaliating  in- 
juries is  much  better  expressed  in  Proverbs,  which  is  a 
collection  as  well  from  the  Gentiles  as  the  Jews,  than  it 
is  in  the  Testament.  It  is  there  said,  Proverbs  xxv,  ver. 
21,  ""  If  thine  enemy  be  hungry^  give  him  bread  to  eat  ; 
and  if  he  be  thirsty^  give  him  water  to  drink ;''''  *  but 
when  it  is  said,  as  in  the  Testament,  ^'' If  a  m.an  smite 
thee  on  the  right  cheeky  turn  to  him  the  other  also  /  "  it 
is  assassinating  the  dignity  of  forbearance,  and  sinking 
man  into  a  spaniel. 

Loving  enemies  is  another  dogma  of  feigned  morality, 
and  has  besides  no  meaning.  It  is  incumbent  on  man, 
as  a  moralist,  that  he  does  not  revenge  an  injury  ;  and  it 
is  equally  as  good  in  a  political  sense,  for  there  is  no  end 
to  retaliation,  each  retaliates  on  the  other,  and  calls  it 
justice  ;  but  to  love  in  proportion  to  the  injury,  if  it  could 
be  done,  would  be  to  offer  a  premium  for  crime.  Besides 
the  word  enemies  is  too  vague  and  general  to  be  used  in 
a  moral  maxim,  which  ought  always  to  be  clear  and 
defined,  like  a  proverb.  If  a  man  be  the  enemy  of  another 
from  mistake  and  prejudice,  as  in  the  case  of  religious 
opinions,  and  sometimes  in  politics,  that  man  is  different 
to  an  enemy  at  heart  with  a  criminal  intention  ;  and  it  is 

*  According  to  what  is  called  Christ's  sermon  on  the  mount,  in  the  book  of  Matthew, 
^rhcre,  among  some  other  good  things,  a  g^eat  deal  of  this  feigned  morality  is  intro- 
-duced.  it  is  there  expressly  said,  that  the  doctrine  of  forbearance,  or  of  not  retaliating 
injuries,  was  not  any  part  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Jews;  but  as  this  doctrine  is  found 
in  Proverbs  it  must,  according  to  that  statement,  have  been  copied  from  the  Gentiles, 
from  whom  Christ  had  learned  it.  Those  men,  whom  Jewish  and  Christian  idolaters 
have  abusively  called  heathens,  had  much  better  and  clearer  ideas  of  justice  and  mo- 
rality than  are  to  be  found  in  the  Old  Testament,  so  far  as  it  is  Jewish  ;  or  in  the  New. 
The  answer  of  Solon  on  the  question.  Which  is  the  most  perfect  popular  government  ? 
lias  never  been  exceeded  by  any  one  since  his  time,  as  containing  a  maxim  of  political 
morality.  "  That,"  says  he.  "  where  the  least  ivjury  done  to  the  meanest  individual,  is 
considered  as  an  insult  Qn  the  whole  constitution.'"  Solon  lived  about  500  years  before 
Christ. 


AGE  OF  KEASf)N.  1 79 

incumbent  npou  as,  and  it  contribntes  also  to  our  own 
tranqnillity,  that  we  put  the  best  construction  upon  a 
thing  that  it  will  bear.  But  even  this  erroneous  motive 
in  him  makes  no  motive  for  love  on  the  other  part  ;  and 
to  say  that  we  can  love  voluntarily,  and  without  a  mo- 
tive, is  morally  and  physically  impossible. 

Morality  is  injured  by  prescribing  to  it  duties  that,  in 
the  first  place,  are  impossible  to  be  performed  ;  and,  if 
they  could  be,  would  be  productive  of  evil  ;  or,  as  before 
said,  be  premiums  for  crime.  The  maxim  of  doing  as 
we  wmild  be  done  u?tto  does  not  include  this  strange  doc- 
trine of  loving  enemies  :  for  no  man  expects  to  be  loved 
himself  for  his  crime  or  for  his  enmity. 

Those  who  preach  this  doctrine  of  loving  their  enemies 
are  in  general  the  greatest  persecutors,  and  they  act  con- 
sistently by  so  doing  ;  for  the  doctrine  is  hypocritical, 
and  it  is  natural  that  hypocrisy  should  act  the  reverse  of 
what  it  preaches.  For  my  own  part  I  disown  the  doc- 
trine, and  consider  it  as  a  feigned  or  fabulous  morality  ; 
yet  the  man  does  not  exist  that  can  say  I  have  persecuted 
him,  or  any  man,  or  any  set  of  men,  either  in  the  Ameri- 
can Revolution,  or  in  the  French  Revolution  ;  or  that  I 
have,  in  any  case,  returned  evil  for  evil.  But  it  is  not 
incumbent  on  man  to  reward  a  bad  action  with  a  good 
one,  or  to  return  good  for  evil ;  and  whenever  it  is  done, 
it  is  a  voluntary  act,  and  not  a  duty.  It  is  also  absurd 
to  suppose  that  such  doctrine  can  make  any  part  of  a 
revealed  religion.  We  imitate  the  moral  character  of  the 
Creator  by  forbearing  with  each  other,  for  he  forbears 
with  all  ;  biit  this  doctrine  would  imply  that  he  loved 
man,  not  in  proportion  as  he  was  good,  but  as  he  was  bad. 

If  we  consider  the  nature  of  our  condition  here,  we 
must  see  there  is  no  occasion  for  such  a  thing  as  revealed 
religion.  What  is  it  we  want  to  know  ?  Does  not  the 
creation,  the  universe  we  behold,  preach  to  us  the  exist- 
ence of  an  Almighty  Power  that  governs  and  regelates 


l8o  AGE  OF   REASON. 

the  whole  ?  And  is  not  the  evidence  that  this  creation 
holds  out  to  onr  senses  infinitely  stronger  than  anything 
we  can  read  in  a  book  that  any  impostor  might  make  and 
call  the  word  of  God  ?  As  for  morality,  the  knowledge  of 
it  exists  in  every  man's  conscience. 

Here  we  are.  The  existence  of  an  Almighty  Power  is 
sufficiently  demonstrated  to  us,  though  we  cannot  con- 
ceive, as  it  is  impossible  we  should,  the  nature  and 
manner  of  its  existence.  We  cannot  conceive  how  we 
came  here  ourselves,  and  yet  we  know  for  a  fact  that  we 
are  here.  We  must  know  also  that  the  power  that  called 
us  into  being,  can,  if  he  please,  and  when  he  pleases,  call 
US  to  account  for  the  manner  in  which  we  have  lived 
here ;  and,  therefore,  without  seeking  any  other  motive 
for  the  belief,  it  is  rational  to  believe  that  he  will,  for  we 
Icnow  beforehand  that  he  can.  The  probability  or  even 
possibility  of  the  thing  is  all  that  we  ought  to  know  ; 
for  if  we  knew  it  as  a  fact,  we  should  be  the  mere  slaves 
of  terror ;  our  belief  would  have  no  merit,  and  our  best 
actions  no  virtue. 

Deism,  then,  teaches  us,  without  the  possibility  of 
being  deceived,  all  that  is  necessary  or  proper  to  be 
known.  The  creation  is  the  Bible  of  the  Deist.  He 
there  reads,  in  the  handwriting  of  the  Creator  himself, 
the  certainty  of  his  existence  and  the  immutability  of  his 
power,  and  all  other  Bibles  and  Testaments  are  to  him 
forgeries.  The  probability  that  we  may  be  called  to  ac- 
count hereafter  will,  to  a  reflecting  mind,  have  the  in- 
fluence of  belief ;  for  it  is  not  our  belief  or  disbelief  that  can 
make  or  unmake  the  fact.  As  this  is  the  state  we  are  in, 
and  which  it  is  proper  we  should  be  in,  as  free  agents, 
it  is  the  fool  only,  and  not  the  philosopher,  or  even  the 
prudent  man,  that  would  live  as  if  there  were  no  God. 

But  the  belief  of  a  God  is  so  weakened  by  being  mixed 
with  the  strange  fable  of  the  Christian  creed,  and  with 
the  wild  adventures  related  in  the  Bible,  and  of  the  ob- 


AGE   OF    REASON.  l8l 

scurity  and  obscene  nonsense  of  tlie  Testament,  that  the 
mind  of  man  is  bewildered  as  in  a  fog.  Viewing  all  these 
things  in  a  confused  mass,  he  confounds  fact  with  fable  ; 
and  as  he  cannot  believe  all,  he  feels  a  disposition  to  re- 
ject all.  But  the  belief  of  a  God  is  a  belief  distinct  from 
all  other  things,  and  ought  not  to  be  confounded  with 
any.  The  notion  of  a  Trinity  of  Gods  has  enfeebled  the 
belief  of  one  God.  A  multiplication  of  beliefs  acts  as  a 
division  of  belief ;  and  in  proportion  as  anything  is  di- 
vided it  is  weakened. 

Religion,  by  such  means,  becomes  a  thing  of  form,  in- 
stead of  fact — of  notion,  instead  of  principles  ;  morality 
is  banished  to  make  room  for  an  imaginary  thing  called 
faith,  and  this  faith  has  its  origin  in  a  supposed  de- 
bauchery ;  a  man  is  preached  instead  of  God  ;  an  exe- 
cution is  an  object  for  gratitude  ;  the  preachers  daub 
themselves  with  the  blood,  like  a  troop  of  assassins,  and 
pretend  to  admire  the  brilliancy  it  gives  them ;  they 
preach  a  humdrum  sermon  on  the  merits  of  the  exe- 
cution ;  then  praise  Jesus  Christ  for  being  executed,  and 
condemn  the  Jews  for  doing  it.  A  man,  by  hearing  all 
this  nonsense  lumped  and  preached  together,  confounds 
the  God  of  the  creation  with  the  imagined  God  of  the 
Christians,  and  lives  as  if  there  were  none. 

Of  all  the  systems  of  religion  that  ever  were  invented, 
there  is  none  more  derogatory  to  the  Almighty,  more  un- 
edifying  to  man,  more  repugnant  to  reason,  and  more 
contradictory  in  itself,  than  this  thing  called  Christianity. 
Too  absurd  for  belief,  too  impossible  to  convince,  and  too 
inconsistent  for  practice,  it  renders  the  heart  torpid,  or  pro- 
duces only  atheists  and  fanatics.  As  an  engine  of  power,  it 
serves  the  purpose  of  depotism  ;  and  as  a  means  of  wealth, 
the  avarice  of  priests  ;  but  so  far  as  respects  the  good  of 
man  in  general,  it  leads  to  nothing  here  or  hereafter. 

The  only  religion  that  has  not  been  invented,  and  that 
lias  in  it  every  evidence  of  divine  originality,  is  pure  and 


1 82  AGE   OF   REASON. 

simple  Deism.  It  must  have  been  the  first,  and  will 
probably  be  the  last,  that  man  believes.  But  pure  and 
simple  Deism  does  not  answer  the  purpose  of  despotic 
governments.  They  cannot  lay  hold  of  religion  as  an 
engine,  but  by  mixing  it  with  human  inventions,  and 
making  their  own  authority  a  part  ;  neither  does  it 
answer  the  avarice  of  priests,  but  by  incorporating  them- 
selves and  their  functions  with  it,  and  becoming,  like 
the  government,  a  party  in  the  system.  It  is  this  that 
forms  the  otherwise  mysterious  connection  of  church  and 
state  ;  the  church  humane,  and  the  state  tyrannic. 

Were  man  impressed  as  fully  and  as  strongly  as  he 
ought  to  be  with  the  belief  of  a  God,  his  moral  life  would 
be  regulated  by  the  force  of  that  belief  ;  he  would  stand 
in  awe  of  God  and  of  himself,  and  would  not  do  the  thing 
that  could  not  be  concealed  from  either.  To  give  this 
belief  the  full  opportunity  of  force,  it  is  necessary  that 
it  acts  alone.  This  is  Deism.  But  when,  according  to 
the  Christian  Trinitarian  scheme,  one  part  of  God  is 
represented  by  a  dying  man,  and  another  part  called  the 
Holy  Ghost,  by  a  flying  pigeon,  it  is  impossible  that 
belief  can  attach  itself  to  such  wild  conceits.* 

It  has  been  the  scheme  of  the  Christian  church,  and  of 
all  the  other  invented  systems  of  religion,  to  hold  man  in 
ignorance  of  the  Creator,  as  it  is  of  Government  to  hold 
man  in  ignorance  of  his  rights.  The  systems  of  the  one 
are  as  false  as  those  of  the  other,  and  are  calculated  for 
mutual  support.  The  study  of  theology,  as  it  stands  in 
Christian  churches,  is  the  study  of  nothing ;  it  is  founded 
on  nothing  ;  it  rests  on  no  principles  ;  it  proceeds  by  no 
authorities;  it  has  no  data;  it  can  demonstrate  nothing; 
and  it  admits  of  no  conclusion.  Not  any  thing  can  be 
studied  as  a  science,  without  our  being  in  possession  of 

•  The  book  called  the  book  of  Matthew  says,  chap,  iii,  verse  16,  that  tfie  Holy  Ghost 
aescenOedinthe  shape  of  adore.  It  might  as  well  have  said  a  goose;  the  creatures  are 
equally  harmless,  and  the  one  is  as  much  of  a  nonsensical  lie  as  the  other.  The  sec- 
ond of  Acts,  ver,  2,  3.  says  that  it  descended  in  a  mighty  rusJting  wind,  in  the  shape 
of  cloven  tongues,  perhaps  It  was  cloven  fi-et.  Such  absurd  stuff  is  onH-fit  for  tales  of 
witches  and  wizards. 


AGE  OF   REASON.  183 

the  principles  upon  which  it  is  founded  ;  and  as  this  is 
not  the  case  with  Christian  theolog}',  it  is  therefore  the 
study  of  nothing. 

Instead  then,  of  studying  theolog>',  as  is  now  done,  out 
of  the  Bible  and  Testament,  the  meanings  of  which  books 
are  always  controverted  and  the  authenticity  of  which  is 
disproved,  it  is  necessary  that  we  refer  to  the  Bible  of  the 
creation.  The  principles  we  discover  there  are  eternal 
and  of  divine  origin  ;  they  are  the  foundation  of  all  the 
science  that  exists  in  the  world,  and  must  be  the  founda- 
tion of  theology. 

We  can  know  God  only  through  his  works.  We  cannot 
have  a  conception  of  any  one  attribute  but  by  following 
some  principle  that  leads  to  it.  We  have  only  a  con- 
fused idea  of  his  power,  if  we  have  not  the  means  of 
comprehending  something  of  its  immensity.  We  can 
have  no  idea  of  his  wisdom,  but  by  knowing  the  order 
and  manner  in  which  it  acts.  The  principles  of  science 
lead  to  this  knowledge  ;  for  the  Creator  of  man  is  the 
Creator  of  science  ;  and  it  is  through  that  medium  that 
man  can  see  God,  as  it  were,  face  to  face. 

Could  a  man  be  placed  in  a  situatioii,  and  endowed 
with  the  power  of  vision,  to  behold  at  one  view,  and  to 
contemplate  deliberately,  the  structure  of  the  universe  ; 
to  mark  the  movements  of  the  several  planets,  the  cause 
of  their  var)-ing  appearances,  the  unerring  order  in  which 
they  revolve,  even  to  the  remotest  comet  ;  their  con- 
nection and  dependence  on  each  other,  and  to  know  the 
system  of  laws  established  by  the  Creator,  that  governs 
and  regulates  the  whole,  he  would  then  conceive,  far  be- 
yond what  any  church  theology  can  teach  him,  the  power, 
the  wisdom,  the  vastness,  the  munificence  of  the  Creator ; 
he  would  then  see,  that  all  the  knowledge  man  has  of 
science,  and  that  all  the  mechanical  arts  by  which  he 
renders  his  situation  comfortable  here,  are  derived  from 
that  source;  his  mind,  exalted  by  the  scene,  and  con- 


184  AGE  OF   REASON. 

vinced  by  the  fact,  would  increase  in  gratitude  as  it  in- 
creased in  knowledge  ;  his  religion  or  his  worship  would 
become  united  with  his  improvement  as  a  man  ;  any  em- 
ployment he  followed,  that  had  any  connection  with  the 
principles  of  the  creation,  as  everything  of  agriculture,  of 
science  and  of  the  mechanical  arts  has,  would  teach  him 
more  of  God,  and  of  the  gratitude  he  owes  to  him,  than 
any  theological  Christian  sermon  he  now  hears.  Great 
objects  inspire  great  thoughts  ;  great  munificence  excites 
great  gratitude  ;  but  the  groveling  tales  and  doctrines 
of  the  Bible  and  the  Testament  are  fit  only  to  excite 
contempt. 

Though  man  cannot  arrive,  at  least  in  this  life,  at  the 
actual  scene  I  have  described,  he  can  demonstrate  it,  be- 
cause he  has  a  knowledge  of  the  principles  upon  which 
the  creation  is  constructed.  *  We  know  that  the  greatest 
works  can  be  represented  in  model,  and  that  the  universe 
can  be  represented  by  the  same  means.  The  same  prin- 
ciples by  which  we  measure  an  inch,  or  an  acre  of  ground, 
will  measure  to  millions  in  extent.  A  circle  of  an  inch 
diameter  has  the  same  geometrical  properties  as  a  circle 
that  would  circumscribe  the  universe.  The  same  pro- 
perties of  a  triangle  that  will  demonstrate  upon  paper  the 
course  of  a  ship,  will  do  it  on  the  ocean  ;  and  when  ap- 
plied to  what  are  called  the  heavenly  bodies,  will  ascertain 
to  a  minute  the  time  of  an  eclipse,  though  these  bodies 
are  millions  of  miles  from  us.  This  knowledge  is  of  di- 
vine origin,  and  it  is  from  the  Bible  of  the  creation  that 

*  The  Bible- makers  have  undertaken  to  give  us,  in  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis,  an 
account  of  the  creation  ;  and  in  doing  this,  they  have  demonstrated  nothing  but  their 
ignorance.  They  make  there  to  have  been  three  days  and  three  nights,  evenings  and 
mornings,  before  there  was  a  sun  ;  when  it  is  the  presence  or  absence  of  the  sun  that 
is  the  cause  of  day  and  night,  and  what  is  called  his  rising  and  setting  that  of  morning 
and  evening.  Besides,  it  is  a  puerile  and  pitiful  idea,  to  suppose  the  Almighty  to  say. 
Let  there  be  light.  It  is  the  imperative  manner  of  speakmg  that  a  conjuror  uses  when 
he  says  to  his  cups  and  balls,  Presto,  begone,  and  most  probably  has  been  taken  from 
it ;  as  Moses  and  his  rod  are  a  cbnjuroraiid  his  wand,  Longinus  calls  this  expression 
the  sublime  :  and,  by  the  same  rule,  the  conjuror  is  sublime  too,  for  the  mannerof 
speaking  is  expressively  and  grammatically  the  same.  When  authors  and  critics  talk 
of  the  sublime,  they  see  not  how  nearly  it  borders  on  the  ridiculous  The  sublime  of 
the  critics,  like  some  parts  of  Edmund  Burke's  Sublime  and  Beautiful,  is  like  a  wind- 
mill just  visible  in  a  fog,  which  imagination  might  distort  into  a  flying  mountain,  or  an 
archangel,  or  a  flock  of  wild  geese. 


AGE  OF   REASON.  185 

man  has  learned  it,  and  not  from  the  stupid   Bible  of 
the  church,  that  teacheth  man  nothing. 

All  the  knowledge  man  has  of  science  and  of  machinery, 
Oy  the  aid  of  which  his  existence  is  rendered  comfortable 
upon  earth,  and  without  which  he  would  be  scarcely  dis- 
tinguishable in  appearance  and  condition  from  a  common 
animal,  comes  from  the  great  machine  and  structure  of 
the  universe.  The  constant  and  unwearied  observations 
of  our  ancestors  upon  the  movements  and  revolutions  of 
the  heavenly  bodies,  in  what  are  supposed  to  have  been  the 
early  ages  of  the  world,  have  brought  this  knowledge 
upon  earth.  It  is  not  Moses  and  the  prophets,  nor  Jesus 
Christ,  nor  his  apostles,  that  have  done  it.  The  Almighty 
is  the  great  mechanic  of  the  creation  ;  the  first  philoso- 
pher and  original  teacher  of  all  science.  Let  us,  then, 
learn  to  reverence  our  master,  and  let  us  not  forget  the 
labors  of  our  ancestors. 

Had  we,  at  this  day,  no  knowledge  of  machinery,  and 
were  it  possible  that  man  could  have  a  view,  as  I  have 
before  described,  of  the  structure  and  machinery  of  the 
universe,  he  would  soon  conceive  the  idea  of  constructing 
some  at  least  of  the  mechanical  works  we  now  have ;  and 
the  idea  so  conceived  would  progressively  advance  in 
practice.  Or  could  a  model  of  the  universe,  such  as  is 
called  an  orrery,  be  presented  before  him  and  put  in 
motion,  his  mind  would  arrive  at  the  same  idea.  Such 
an  object  and  such  a  subject  would,  while  it  improved 
him  in  knowledge  useful  to  himself  as  a  man  and  a  mem- 
ber of  society,  as  well  as  entertaining,  afford  far  better 
matter  for  impressing  him  with  a  knowledge  of,  and  a 
belief  in,  the  Creator,  and  of  the  reverence  and  gratitude 
that  man  owes  to  him,  than  the  stupid  texts  of  the  Bible 
and  of  the  Testament,  from  which,  be  the  talents  of  the 
preacher  what  they  may,  only  stupid  sennons  can  be 
preached.  If  man  must  preach,  let  him  preach  something 
that  is  edifying,  and  from  texts  that  are  known  to  be  true. 


1 86  AGE  OF   REASON. 

The  Bible  of  the  creation  is  inexhaustible  in  texts. 
Every  part  of  science,  whether  connected  with  the  geom- 
etry of  the  universe,  with  the  systems  of  animal  and  vege- 
table life,  or  with  the  properties  of  inanimate  matter,  is  a 
text  as  well  for  devotion  as  for  philosophy — for  gratitude 
as  for  human  improvement.  It  will  perhaps  be  said,  that 
if  such  a  revolution  in  the  system  of  religion  takes  place, 
every  preacher  ought  to  be  a  philosopher.  Most  cer- 
tainly ;  and  every  house  of  devotion  a  school  of  science. 

It  has  been  by  wandering  from  the  immutable  laws  of 
science,  and  the  right  use  of  reason,  and  setting  up  an 
invented  thing  called  revealed  religion,  that  so  many 
wild  and  blasphemous  conceits  have  been  formed  of  the 
Almighty.  The  Jews  have  made  him  the  assassin  of  the 
human  species  to  make  room  for  the  religion  of  the  Jews. 
The  Christians  have  made  him  the  murderer  of  himself 
and  the  founder  of  a  new  religion,  to  supersede  and  expel 
the  Jewish  religion.  And  to  find  pretence  and  admission 
for  these  things,  they  must  have  supposed  his  power  or 
his  wisdom  imperfect,  or  his  will  changeable;  and  the 
changeableness  of  the  will  is  imperfection  of  the  judg- 
ment. The  philosopher  knows  that  the  laws  of  the  Creator 
have  never  changed  with  respect  either  to  the  principles 
of  science,  or  the  properties  of  matter.  Why,  then,  is  it 
supposed  they  have  changed  with  respect  to  man  ? 

I  here  close  the  subject.  I  have  shown  in  all  the 
foregoing  parts  of  this  work,  that  the  Bible  and  Testa- 
ment are  impositions  and  forgeries  ;  and  I  leave  the 
evidence  I  have  produced  in  proof  of  it,  to  be  refuted,  if 
any  one  can  do  it  :  and  I  leave  the  ideas  that  are  sug- 
gested in  the  conclusion  of  the  work,  to  rest  on  the  mind 
of  the  reader  ;  certain  as  I  am,  that  when  opinions  are 
free,  either  in  matters  of  government  or  religion,  truth 
will  finally  and  powerfully  prevail. 

END   OF  THE   SECOND   PART. 


AGE  OF  REASON, 


AN  EXAMINATION 

OK     THE    PASSAGES     IN    THE    NEW    TESTAMENT     (QUOTED    FKO.M    THE 
OLD,  AND    CALLED    PROPHECIES  CONCERNING  JESUS  CHRIST. 

TO  WHICH   18  ADDED 

AN  ESSAY  ON  DREAMS. 

AI.so   AN"   APPKMniX,   CONTAINING  THE 

CONTRADICTORY  DOCTRINES   HE  PWEEN  MATTHEW 
AND  MARK. 


MY  PRIVATE  THOUGHTS  OX  A  FUTURE  SFATE. 


THOMAS  PAIXE. 


PART  III. 


New  York : 
PETER  ECKLER.  PUBLISHER, 

35  Fri.TON  .Street. 


PREFACE. 


TO  THE  MINISTERS  AND    PREACHERS    OF    ALL    DENOM- 
INATIONS   OF    RELIGION. 

IT  is  the  duty  of  every  man,  as  far  as  his  ability  ex- 
tends, to  detect  and  expose  delusion  and  error.  But 
nature  has  not  given  to  every  one  a  talent  for  that 
purpose  ;  and  among  those  to  whom  such  a  talent  is 
given,  there  is  often  a  want  of  disposition  or  of  courage 
to  do  it. 

The  world,  or  more  properly  speaking,  that  small  part 
of  it  called  Christendom,  or  the  Christian  world,  has 
been  amused  for  more  than  a  thousand  years  with 
accounts  of  prophecies  in  the  Old  Testament,  about  the 
coming  of  the  person  called  Jesus  Christ,  and  thousands 
of  sermons  have  been  preached,  and  volumes  written  to 
make  man  believe  it. 

In  the  following  treatise  I  have  examined  all  the 
passages  in  the  New  Testament  quoted  from  the  Old, 
and  called  prophecies  concerning  Jesus  Christ,  and  I  find 
no  such  a  thing  as  a  prophecy  of  any  such  person,  and  I 
deny  there  are  any.  The  passages  all  relate  to  circum- 
stances the  Jewish  nation  was  in  at  the  time  they  were 
written  or  spoken,  and  not  to  any  thing  that  was  or  was 
not  to  happen  in  the  world  several  hundred  years  after- 
wards ;  and  I  have  shown  what  the  circumstances  were, 
to  which  the  passages  apply  or  refer.  I  have  given 
chapter  and  verse  for  every  thing  I  have  said,  and  have 
not  gone  out  of  the  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment for  evidence,  that  the  passages  are  not  prophecies 
of  the  person  called  Jesus  Christ. 


190  PREFACE. 

The  prejudice  of  unfounded  belief  often  degenerates 
into  the  prejudice  of  custom,  and  becomes,  at  last,  rank 
hypocrisy.  When  men,  from  custom  or  fashion,  or  any 
wordly  motive,  profess  or  pretend  to  believe  what  they 
do  not  believe,  nor  can  give  any  reason  for  believing, 
they  unship  the  helm  of  their  morality,  and  being  no 
longer  honest  to  their  own  minds  they  feel  no  moral 
difficulty  in  being  unjust  to  others.  It  is  from  the  in- 
fluence of  this  vice,  hypocrisy,  that  we  see  so  many 
church  and  meeting-going  professors  and  pretenders  to 
religion,  so  full  of  trick  and  deceit  in  their  dealings,  and 
so  loose  in  the  performance  of  their  engagements,  that 
they  are  not  to  be  trusted  further  than  the  laws  of  the 
country  will  bind  them.  Morality  has  no  hold  on  their 
minds,  no  restraint  on  their  actions. 

One  set  of  preachers  make  salvation  to  consist  in 
believing.  They  tell  their  congregations,  that  if  they 
believe  in  Christ,  their  sins  shall  be  forgiven.  This,  in 
the  first  place,  is  an  encouragement  to  sin,  in  a  similar 
manner  as  when  a  prodigal  young  fellow  is  told  his  father 
will  pay  all  his  debts,  he  runs  into  debt  the  faster,  and 
becomes  the  more  extravagant.  Daddy,  says  he,  pays 
all,  and  on  he  goes.  Just  so  in  the  other  case,  Christ 
pays  all,  and  on  goes  the  sinner. 

In  the  next  place,  the  doctrine  these  men  preach  is  not 
true.  The  New  Testament  rests  itself  for  credibility  and 
testimony  on  what  are  called  prophecies  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment of  the  person  called  Jesus  Christ ;  and  if  there  are 
no  such  things  as  propliecies  of  any  such  person  in  the 
Old  Testament,  the  New  Testament  is  a  forgery  of  the 
councils  of  Nice  and  Laodicea,  and  the  faith  founded 
thereon,  delusion  and  falsehood.  * 

*  The  councils  of  Nice  and  Laodicea  were  held  about  350  years  after  the  time 
Christ  IS  said  to  have  lived;  and  the  books  that  now  compose  the  New  Testament, 
were  then  voted  for  by  yeas  and  nays,  as  we  now  vote  a  law.  A  great  many  that 
were  offered  had  a  majority  of  nays,  and  were  rejected.  This  is  the  way  the  New 
Testament  came  into  being. t 

tThe  rejected  gospels  are  now  known  as  77/.?  Apocryphal  New  Testament.— Pub. 


PREFACE.  191 

Another  set  of  preachers  tell  their  congregations  that 
God  predestinated  and  selected  from  all  eternity,  a  certain 
number  to  be  saved,  and  a  certain  number  to  be  damned 
eternally.  If  this  were  true,  the  day  of  judgment  is  past: 
their  preaching  is  in  vain,  and  they  had  better  work  at 
some  useful  calling  for  their  livelihood. 

This  doctrine  also,  like  the  former,  hath  a  direct  tend- 
ency to  demoralize  mankind.  Can  a  bad  man  be  reform- 
ed by  telling  him,  that  if  he  is  one  of  those  who  was 
decreed  to  be  damned  before  he  was  born,  his  reformation 
will  do  him  no  good  ;  and  if  he  was  decreed  to  be  saved 
he  will  be  saved,  whether  he  believes  it  or  not  ?  for 
this  is  the  result  of  the  doctrine.  *  Such  preaching  and 
such  preachers  do  injury  to  the  moral  world.  They  had 
better  be  at  the  plough. 

As  in  my  political  works  my  motive  and  object  have 
been  to  give  man  an  elevated  sense  of  his  own  character, 
and  to  free  him  from  the  slavish  and  superstitious  absurdi- 
ty of  monarchy,  and  hereditary  government,  so  in  my 
publications  on  religious  subjects,  my  endeavors  have 
been  directed  to  bring  man  to  a  right  use  of  the  reason 
that  God  has  given  him  ;  to  impress  on  him  the  great 
principles  of  divine  morality,  justice,  mercy,  and  a  be- 
nevolent disposition  to  all  men,  and  to  all  creatures,  and 
to  inspire  in  him  a  spirit  of  trust,  confidence,  and  con- 
solation, in  his  Creator,  unshackled  by  the  fables  of 
books  pretending  to  be  the  word  of  God. 

THOMAS  PAINE. 


INTRODUCTION. 

A  S  a  great  deal  is  said  in  the  New  Testameni 
X~~V  about  dreams,  it  is  first  necessary  to  explain  the 
nature  of  a  dream,  and  to  show  by  what  operation  of 
the  mind  a  dream  is  produced  during  sleep.  When 
this  is  understood  we  shall  be  better  enabled  to  judge 
whether  any  reliance  can  be  placed  upon  them  :  and 
consequently,  whether  the  several  matters  in  the  New 
Testament  related  of  dreams  deserve  the  credit  which 
the  writers  of  that  book  and  priests  and  commentators 
ascribe  to  them. 


AN  EXAMINATION 

OF  THE 

PASSAGES  IN  THE  NEW  TESTAiMENT 

-QUOTED   FROM  THE  OLD,    AND    CALLED   PROPHECIES  OF 
THE  COMING  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


THE  passages  called  prophecies  of  or  concerning 
Jesus  Christ  in  the  Old  Testament^  may  be  classed 
under  the  two  following  heads  : — 

First,  Those  referred  to  in  fhe  four  books  of  the 
New  Testament  called  the  four  Evangelists,  Matthew, 
Mark,  Luke,  and  John. 

Secondly^  Those  which  translators  and  commentators 
have,  of  their  own  imagination,  erected  into  prophecies, 
and  dubbed  with  that  title  at  the  head  of  the  several 
■chapters  of  the  Old  Testament.  Of  these  it  is  scarcely 
worth  while  to  waste  time,  ink,  and  paper  upon  ;  I  shall 
therefore  confine  myself  chiefly  to  those  referred  to  in  the 
aforesaid  four  books  of  the  New  Testament.  If  I  show 
that  these  are  not  prophecies  of  the  person  called  Jesus 
Christ,  nor  have  reference  to  any  such  person,  it  will  be 
perfectly  needless  to  combat  those  which  translators  or 
the  Church  have  invented,  and  for  which  they  had  no 
other  authority  than  their  own  imagination. 

I  begin  with  the  book  called  the  Gospel  according  to 
St.  Matthew. 

In  the  first  chapter,  ver.  i8,  it  is  said,  "  Nrw  the  birth 
^f  Jesus  Christ  was  on  this  wise :  When  as  his  mother 
Mary  was  espoused  to  Joseph^  before  they  came  together 


196  AGE   OF   REASON. 

SHE   WAS    FOUND   WITH    CHILD    BY  THE    HOLY   GHOST.'* 

This  is  going  a  little  too  fast ;  because  to  make  this  verse 
agree  with  the  next,  it  should  have  said  no  more  than 
that  she  was  found  with  child  ;  for  the  next  verse  says, 
"  Then  Joseph  her  husband^  being  a  just  tnan^  and  not 
willing  to  make  her  a  public  example^  was  minded  to  put 
her  away  privily. ''''  Consequently  Joseph  had  found  out 
no  more  than  that  she  was  with  child,  and  he  knew  it 
was  not  by  himself. 

V.  20.  ''''And  while  he  thought  on  these  things  (that  is, 
whether  he  should  put  her  away  privily,  or  make  a  public 
example  of  her)  behold^  the  angel  of  the  Lord  appeared 
unto  him  in  a  dream  (that  is,  Joseph  dreamed  that  an 
angel  appeared  unto  him),  sayings  Joseph.^  thou  son  of 
David.,  fear  not  to  take  unto  thee  Mary  thy  wife  :  for  that 
which  is  conceived  in  her  is  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  And  she 
shall  bring  forth  a  son.,  and  thou  shall  call  his  name  Jesus  : 
for  he  shall  save  his  people  frotn  their  sins.'''' 

Now,  without  entering  into  any  discussion  upon  the 
merits  or  demerits  of  the  account  here  given,  it  is  proper 
to  observe,  that  it  has  no  higher  authority  than  that  of  a 
dream  :  for  it  is  impossible  for  a  man  to  behold  any  thing 
in  a  dream  but  that  which  he  dreams  of.  I  ask  not, 
therefore,  whether  Joseph  (if  there  was  such  a  man)  had 
such  a  dream  or  not ;  because,  admitting  he  had,  it  proves 
nothing.  So  wonderful  and  irrational  is  the  faculty  of 
the  mind  in  dreams,  that  it  acts  the  part  of  all  the 
characters  its  imagination  creates,  and  what  it  thinks  it 
hears  from  any  of  them  is  no  other  than  what  the  roving 
rapidity  of  its  own  imagination  invents.  It  is  therefore 
nothing  to  me  what  Joseph  dreamed  of —  whether  of  the 
fidelity  or  infidelity  of  his  wife.  I  pay  no  regard  to  my 
own  dreams,  and  I  should  be  weak  indeed  to  put  faith  in 
the  dreams  of  another. 

The   verses  that  follow  those  I  have  quoted  are  the 
words  of  the  writer  of  the  book  of  Matthew.      "  iVbze/ 


AGK   OF   REASON.  197 

(says  he)  all  this  (that  is,  all  this  dreaming  and  this  pieg- 
nancy)  ivas  done  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was 
spoken  of  the  Lord  by  the  prophet^  saying, 

"  Behold,  a  virgin  shall  be  with  child,  and  shall  bring 
forth  a  son,  and  they  shall  call  his  name  Emmanuel, 
which,  being  interpreted,  is,  God  with  us.^'' 

This  passage  is  in  Isaiah,  chap.  vii.  ver.  14,  and  the 
writer  of  the  book  of  Mathew  endeavors  to  make  his 
readers  believe  that  this  passage  is  a  prophecy  of  the 
person  called  Jesus  Christ.  It  is  no  such  thing — and  I 
go  to  show  it  is  not.  But  it  is  first  necessary  that  I  ex- 
plain the  occasion  of  these  words  being  spoken  by  Isaiah  : 
the  reader  will  then  easily  perceive,  that  so  far  from  their 
being  a  prophecy  of  Jesus  Christ,  they  have  not  the  least 
reference  to  such  a  person,  or  to  any  thing  that  could 
happen  in  the  time  that  Christ  is  said  to  have  lived  — 
which  was  about  seven  hundred  years  after  the  time  of 
Isaiah.     The  case  is  this  : 

On  the  death  of  Solomon  the  Jewish  nation  split  into 
two  monarchies ;  one  called  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  the 
capital  of  which  was  Jerusalem  ;  the  other  the  kingdom 
of  Israel,  the  capital  of  which  was  Samaria.  The  king- 
dom of  Judah  followed  the  line  of  David,  and  the  kingdom 
of  Israel  that  of  Saul ;  and  these  two  rival  monarchies 
frequently  carried  on  fierce  wars  against  each  other. 

At  the  time  Ahaz  was  king  of  Judah,  which  was  in  the 
time  of  Isaiah,  Pekah  was  king  of  Israel ;  and  Pekah 
joined  himself  to  Resin,  king  of  Syria,  to  make  war 
against  Ahaz,  king  of  Judah ;  and  these  two  kings 
marched  a  confederated  and  powerful  army  against 
Jerusalem.  Ahaz  and  his  people  became  alarmed  at  the 
danger,  and  ^^  their  hearts  were  moved  as  the  trees  of  the 
wood  are  moved  with  the  wind.'''*  Isaiah,  chapter  vii. 
verse  2. 

In  this  perilous  situation  of  things,  Isaiah  addresses 
himself  to  Ahaz,  and  assures  him,  in  the  name  of  the 


198  AGE   OF   REASON. 

Lord  (the  cant  phrase  of  all  the  prophets)  that  these  two 
kings  should  not  succeed  against  him  ;  and  to  assure 
him  that  this  should  be  the  case  (the  case  however  was 
directly  contrary*),  tells  Ahaz  to  ask  a  sign  of  the  Lord. 
This  Ahaz  declined  doing,  giving  as  a  reason,  that  he 
would  not  tempt  the  Lord  ;  upon  which  Isaiah,  who  pre- 
tends to  be  seut  from  God,  says,  ver.  14,  ' '  Therefore  the 
Lord  himself  shall  give  you  a  sign ;  Behold^  a  virgin 
shall  conceive  and  bear  a  son.  Butter  and  honey  shall 
he  eat,  that  he  may  know  to  refuse  the  evil  and  choose 
the  good.  For  before  the  child  shall  know  to  refuse  the  evil 
and  choose  the  good,  the  land  that  thou  abhorrest  shall 
be  forsaken  of  both  her  kings," — meaning  the  king  of 
Israel  and  the  king  of  Syria,  who  were  marching  against 
him. 

Here  then  is  the  sign,  which  was  to  be  the  birth  of  a 
child,  and  that  child  a  son ;  and  here  also  is  the  time 
limited  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  sign,  namely, 
before  the  child  shall  know  to  refuse  the  evil  and  choose 
the  good. 

The  thing,  therefore,  to  be  a  sign  of  success  to  Ahaz, 
must  be  something  that  would  take  place  before  the  event 
of  the  battle  then  pending  between  him  and  the  two 
kings  could  be  known,  A  thing  to  be  a  sign  must  pre- 
cede the  thing  signified.  The  sign  of  rain  must  be 
before  the  rain. 

It  would  have  been  mockery  and  insulting  nonsense 
for  Isaiah  to  have  assured  Ahaz,  as  a  sign  that  these  two 
kings  should  not  prevail  against  him,  that  a  child  should 
be  born  seven  hundred  years  after  he  was  dead  ;  and  that 

'2  Chronicles  chap,  xxviii.  ver.  i.  Ahaz  was  twenty  years  old  when  he  began  to 
reign,  and  he  reigned  sixteen  years  in  Jerusalem,  but  he  did  not  that  which  was  right 
in  the  sight  of  the  Lord, — Ver.  5.  Wherefore  the  Lord  his  God  delivered  him  into  the 
hand  of  the  king  of  Syria,  and  Ihey  smote  him,  and  carried  away  a  great  multitude  of 
them  captives,  and  brought  them  to  Damascus:  and  he  was  also  delivered  into  the 
hand  of  the  king  of  Israel,  who  smote  him  with  a  great  slaughter. 

Ver.  6  And  Pekah  (king  of  Israel)  slew  in  Judah  an  hundred  and  twenty  thousand 
in  one  day.  Ver.  8.  And  the  children  of  Israel  carried  away  captive  of  their  brethren, 
two  hundred  thousand   women,  sons,  and  daughters. 


AOE   OF    REASON.  I99 

before  the  child  so  bom  should  know  to  refuse  the  evil 
and  choose  the  good,  he  Ahaz,  should  be  delivered  from 
the  danger  he  was  then  immediately  threatened  with. 

But  the  case  is,  that  the  child  of  which  Isaiah  speaks 
was  his  own  child,  with  which  his  wife  or  his  mistress 
was  then  pregnant :  for  he  says  in  the  next  chapter, 
ver.  2,  3,  "  And  I  took  unto  me  faithful  witnesses  to  re- 
cord^ Uriah  the  priest,  and  Zechariah  the  son  of  Jeber- 
echiah.  And  I  went  unto  the  prophetess  ;  and  she 
conceived  and  bare  a  son/^  And  he  says  at  ver.  18  of 
the  same  chapter,  "  Behold,  F  and  the  children  whom  the 
Lord  hath  given  me  are  for  signs  and  for  wonders  in 
Israel. ' ' 

It  may  not  be  improper  here  to  observe  that  the  word 
translated  a  virgin  in  Isaiah,  does  not  sig^nify  a  virginin 
Hebrew,  but  merely  a  young  woman.  The  tense  also  is 
falsified  in  the  translation.  Levi  gives  the  Hebrew  text 
of  the  14th  verse  of  the  7th  chapter  of  Isaiah,  and  the 
translation  in  English  with  it — ''''Behold,  a  young  woman 
is  with  child,  and  beareth  a  son.''^  The  expression,  says 
he,  is  in  the  present  tense.  The  translation  agrees  with 
the  other  circumstances  related  of  the  birth  of  this  child, 
which  was  to  be  a  sign  to  Ahaz.  But  as  the  true  trans- 
lation could  not  have  been  imposed  upon  the  world  as  a 
prophecy  of  a  child  to  be  born  seven  hundred  years  after- 
wards, the  Christian  translators  have  falsified  the  original ; 
and  instead  of  making  Isaiah  to  say.  Behold,  a  young 
woman  is  with  child,  and  beareth  ason— they  have  made 
him  to  say,  Behold,  a  virgin  shall  conceive  and  bear  a 
son.  It  is,  however,  only  necessary  for  a  person  to  read 
the  7th  and  8th  chapters  of  Isaiah,  and  he  will  be  con- 
vinced that  the  passage  in  question  is  no  prophecy  of  the 
person  called  Jesus  Christ.  I  pass  on  to  the  second 
passage  quoted  from  the  Old  Testament  by  the  New  as  a 
prophecy  of  Jesus  Christ. 

Matthew,  chap.  ii.  ver.  i.    '*  Now  when  Jesus  was  bom 


200  AGE   OF    REASON. 

in  Bethlehem  of  Judea,  in  the  days  of  Herod  the  king, 
behold,  there  came  wise  men  from  the  east  to  Jerusalem, 
— saying,  Where  is  he  that  is  born  king  of  the  Jews? 
for  we  have  seen  his  star  in  the  east,  and  are  come  to 
worship  him.  When  Herod  the  king  had  heard  these 
things,  he  was  troubled,  and  all  Jerusalem  with  him. 
And  when  he  had  gathered  all  the  chief  priests  and 
scribes  of  the  people  together,  he  demanded  of  them 
where  Christ  should  be  born.  And  they  said  unto  him, 
In  Bethlehem  of  Judea  ;  for  thus  it  is  written  by  the  pro- 
phet,— And  thou  Bethlehem  in  the  land  of  Juda^  art  not 
the  least  among  the  princes  ofjuda  :  for  out  of  thee  shall 
cornea  Governor  that  shall  rule  my  people  Israel.  This 
passage  is  in  Micah,  chapter  v.  verse  2. 

I  pass  over  the  absurdity  of  seeing  and  following  a  star 
in  the  day-time,  as  a  man  would  a  Will-with-the-wisp^ 
or  a  candle  and  lanthorn,  at  night ;  and  also  that  of 
seeing  it  in  the  east  when  themselves  came  from  the  east ; 
for  could  such  a  thing  be  seen  at  all  to  serve  them  for  a 
guide,  it  must  be  in  the  west  to  them.  I  confine  myself 
to  the  passage  called  a  prophecy  of  Jesus  Christ. 

The  book  of  Micah,  in  the  passage  above  quoted, 
chapter  v.  verse  2,  is  speaking  of  some  person,  without 
mentioning  his  name,  from  whom  some  great  achieve- 
ments were  expected  ;  but  the  description  he  gives  of  this 
person  at  the  5th  verse  proves  evidently  that  it  is  not 
Jesus  Christ,  for  he  says  at  the  5th  verse,  "And  this  man 
shall  be  the  peace,  when  the  Assyrian  shall  come  into 
our  land  :  and  when  he  shall  tread  in  our  palaces,  then 
shall  we  raise  against  him  (that  is,  against  the  Assyrian) 
seven  shepherds,  and  eight  principal  men.  Ver.  6,  And 
they  shall  waste  the  land  of  Assyria  with  the  sword,  and 
the  land  of  Nimrod  in  the  entrances  thereof:  thus  shall 
he  (the  person  spoken  of  at  the  head  of  the  second  verse) 
deliver  us  from  the  Assyrian  when  he  cometh  into  our 
land,  and  when  he  treadeth  within  our  borders." 


AGE   OF    REASON.  20I 

This  is  SO  evidently  descriptive  of  a  military  chief, 
that  it  cannot  be  applied  to  Christ  without  out- 
raging the  character  they  pretend  to  give  us  of  him. 
Besides,  which,  the  circumstances  of  the  times  here 
spoken  of,  and  those  of  the  times  in  which  Christ  is  said 
to  have  lived,  are  in  contradiction  to  each  other.  It  was 
the  Romans  and  not  the  Assyrians,  that  had  conquered 
and  were  in  the  /awafof  Judea,  and  trod  in  their  palaces 
when  Christ  was  bom,  and  when  he  died  ;  and  so  far 
from  his  driving  them  out,  it  was  they  who  signed  the- 
warrant  for  his  execution,  and  he  suffered  under  it. 

Having  thus  shown  that  this  is  no  prophecy  of  Jesus 
Christ,  I  pass  on  to  the  third  passage  quoted  from  the 
Old  Testament  by  the  New  as  a  prophecy  of  him. 

This,  like  the  first  I  have  spoken  of,  is  introduced  by 
a  dream.  Joseph  dreameth  another  dream,  and  dreameth 
that  he  seeth  another  angel.  The  account  begins  at  the 
13th  verse  of  2nd  chap,  of  Matthew. 

"The  angel  of  the  Lord  appeareth  to  Joseph  in  a  dream, 
saying.  Arise,  and  take  the  young  child  and  his  mother, 
and  flee  into  Egypt,  and  be  thou  there  until  I  bring  thee 
word  :  for  Herod  will  seek  the  young  child  to  destroy 
him.  When  he  arose  he  took  the  young  child  and  his 
mother  by  night,  and  departed  into  Egypt :  and  was 
there  until  the  death  of  Herod  :  that  it  might  be  fulfilled 
which  was  spoken  of  the  Lord  by  the  prophet,  saying. 
Out  of  Egypt  have  I  called  my  son." 

This  passage  is  in  the  book  of  Hosea,  chap.  xi.  ver.  i. 
The  words  are,  "When  Israel  was  a  child,  then  I 
loved  him,  and  called  my  son  out  of  Egypt.  As  they 
called  them,  so  they  went  from  them  :  they  sacrificed 
unto  Baalim,  and  burned  incense  to  graven  images." 

This  passage,  falsely  called  a  prophecy  of  Christ,  refers 
to  the  children  of  Israel  coming  out  of  Egypt  in  the  time 
of  Pharaoh,  and  to  the  idolatry  they  committed  afterwards. 
To  make  it  apply  to  Jesus  Christ,  he  then  must  be  the 


202  AGE    OF    REASON. 

person  who  "sacrificed  unto  Baalim  and  burnt  incense 
to  graven  images  ;"  for  the  person  called  out  of  Egypt 
by  the  collective  name  Israel,  and  the  persons  committing 
this  idolatry,  are  the  same  persons,  or  the  descendants  of 
them.  This  then  can  be  no  prophecy  of  Jesus  Christ 
unless  they  are  willing  to  make  an  idolator  of  him.  I 
pass  on  to  the  fourth  passage  called  a  prophecy  by  the 
writer  of  the  book  of  Matthew. 

This  is  introduced  by  a  story  told  by  nobody  but  him- 
self, and  scarcely  believed  by  any  body,  of  the  slaughter 
of  all  the  children  under  two  years  old,  by  the  command 
of  Herod  :  a  thing  which  it  is  not  probable  could  be  done 
by  Herod,  as  he  only  held  an  office  under  the  Roman 
government,  to  which  appeals  could  always  be  had,  as 
we  see  in  the  case  of  Paul. 

Matthew,  however,  having  made  or  told  this  story, 
says,  chap.  ii.  ver.  17,  "Then  was  fulfilled  that  which 
was  spoken  by  Jeremy  the  prophet,  saying,  In  Rama 
was  there  a  voice  heard^  lamentation^  and  weeping^  and 
great  mourning.^  Rachel  weeping  for  her  children.,  and 
would  not  be  comforted.,  because  they  are  not. 

This  passage  is  in  Jeremiah,  chap.  xxxi.  ver.  15  ;  and 
this  verse,  when  separated  from  the  verses  before  and 
after  it,  and  which  explain  its  application,  might  with 
equal  propriety  be  applied  to  every  case  of  wars,  sieges, 
and  other  violences,  such  as  the  Christians  themselves 
have  often  done  to  the  Jews,  where  mothers  have  lamented 
the  loss  of  their  children.  There  is  nothing  in  the  verse 
taken  singly  that  designates  or  points  out  any  particular 
application  of  it,  otherwise  than  that  it  points  to  some 
circumstances  which,  at  the  time  of  writing  it,  had  already 
happened,  and  not  to  a  thing  yet  to  happen,  for  the  verse 
is  in  the  preter  or  past  tense.  I  go  to  explain  the  case, 
and  show  the  application  of  the  verse. 

Jeremiah  lived  in  the  time  that  Nebuchadnezzar  be- 
sieged, took,   plundered,  and  destroyed  Jerusalem,   and 


AGE   OF    REASON.  203 

led  the  Jews  captive  to  Babylon.  He  carried  his  violence 
against  the  Jews  to  every  extreme.  He  slew  the  sons  of 
king  Zedekiah  before  his  face  ;  he  then  put  out  the  eyes 
of  Zedekiah,  and  kept  him  in  prison  till  the  day  of  his 
death. 

It  is  of  this  time  of  sorrow  and  suffering  to  the  Jews 
that  Jeremiah  is  speaking.  Their  temple  was  destroyed, 
their  land  desolated,  their  nation  and  government  entirely 
broken  up,  and  themselves,  men,  women,  and  children, 
carried  into  captivity.  They  had  too  many  sorrows  of 
their  own  immediately  before  their  eyes,  to  permit  them, 
or  any  of  their  chiefs,  to  be  employing  themselves  on 
things  that  might,  or  might  not,  happen  in  the  world 
seven  hundred  years  afterwards. 

It  is,  as  already  observed,  of  this  time  of  sorrow  and 
suffering  to  the  Jews  that  Jeremiah  is  speaking  in  the 
verse  in  question.  In  the  two  next  verses,  the  i6th  and 
17th,  he  endeavors  to  console  the  suflferers  by  giving 
them  hopes,  and,  according  to  the  fashion  of  speaking  in 
those  days,  assurances  from  the  Lord  that  their  suflferings 
should  have  an  end,  and  that  their  children  should  return 
again  to  their  own  land.  But  I  leave  the  verses  to  speak 
for  themselves,  and  the  Old  Testament  to  testify  against 
the  New. 

Jeremiah,  chap.  xxxi.  ver.  15. — "Thus said  the  Lord, 
A  voice  was  heard  in  Ramah,  (it  is  in  the  preter  tense) 
lamentation  and  bitter  weeping :  Rachel  weeping  for  her 
children,  refused  to  be  comforted  for  her  children,  because 
they  were  not. 

Verse  16. — "Thus  said  the  Lord,  Refrain  thy  voice 
from  weeping,  and  thine  eyes  from  tears ;  for  thy  work 
shall  be  rewarded,  saith  the  Lord,  and  they  shall  come 
again  from  the  land  of  the  enemy. 

Verse  17. — "  And  there  is  hope  in  thine  end,  saith  the 
Lord,  and  thy  children  shall  come  again  to  their  own 
border." 


204  AGE   OF   REASON. 

By  what  strange  ignorance  or  imposition  is  it,  that  the 
children  of  which  Jeremiah  speaks  (meaning  the  people 
of  the  Jewish  nation,  scripturally  called  children  of  Israel, 
and  not  mere  infants  under  two  years  old),  and  who  were 
to  return  again  from  the  land  of  the  enemy,  and  come 
again  into  their  own  borders,  can  mean  the  children  that 
Matthew  makes  Herod  to  slaughter?  Could  those  return 
again  from  the  land  of  the  enemy,  or  how  can  the  land  of 
the  enemy  be  applied  to  them?  Could  they  come  to  their 
own  borders?  Good  Heavens  !  how  has  the  world  been 
imposed  upon  by  Testament-makers,  priestcraft  and  pre- 
tended prophecies  !  I  pass  on  to  the  fifth  passage  called 
a  prophecy  of  Jesus  Christ. 

This,  like  two  of  the  former,  is  introduced  by  a  dream. 
Joseph  dreamed  another  dream,  and  dreameth  of  another 
angel.  And  Matthew  is  again  the  historian  of  the  dream 
and  the  dreamer.  If  it  were  asked  how  Matthew  could 
know  what  Joseph  dreamed,  neither  the  Bishop  nor  all 
the  Church  could  answer  the  question.  Perhaps  it  was 
Matthew  that  dreamed  and  not  Joseph  ;  that  is,  Joseph 
dreamed  by  proxy,  in  Matthew's  brain,  as  they  tell  us 
Daniel  dreamed  for  Nebuchadnezzar.  But  be  this  as  it 
may,  I  go  on  with  my  subject. 

The  account  of  this  dream  is  in  Matthew,  chap.  ii. 
ver.  19  to  23.  "But  when  Herod  was  dead,  behold,  an 
angel  of  the  Lord  appeareth  in  a  dream  to  Joseph  in 
Egypt,  saying.  Arise,  and  take  the  young  child  and  his 
mother,  and  go  into  the  land  of  Israel ;  for  they  are  dead 
which  sought  the  young  child's  life.  And  he  arose,  and 
took  the  young  child  and  his  mother  and  came  into  the 
land  of  Israel.  But  when  he  heard  that  Archelaus  did 
reign  in  Judea  in  the  room  of  his  father  Herod,  he  was 
afraid  to  go  thither  :  notwithstanding,  being  warned  of 
God  in  a  dream,  (here  is  another  dream,)  he  turned  aside 
into  the  parts  of  Galilee  :  and  he  came  and  dwelt  in  a 
city  called  Nazareth  :  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which 


AGE  OF   REASON.  205 

was    spoken    b>-    the    prophets,    He   shall    be    called    a 
Nazarene." 

Here  is  good  circumstancial  evidence  that  Matthew 
dreamed,  for  there  is  no  such  passage  in  all  the  Old 
Testament ;  and  I  invite  the  Bishop  and  all  the  priests 
in  Christendom,  including  those  of  America,  to  produce 
it  I  pass  on  to  the  sikth  passage  called  a  prophecy  of 
Jesus  Christ. 

This,  as  Swift  says  on  another  occasion,  is  lugged  in 
head  and  shoulders :  it  needs  only  to  be  seen  in  order  to 
be  hooted  as  a  forced  and  far-fetched  piece  of  imposition. 

Matthew,  chap.  iv.  ver.  12. — "Now  when  Jesus  had 
heard  that  John  was  cast  into  prison,  he  departed  into 
Galilee.  And  leaving  Nazareth,  he  came  and  dwelt  in 
Capernaum,  which  is  upon  the  sea-coast,  in  the  borders  of 
Zabulun  and  Nephtalim  :  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which 
was  spoken  by  Esaias  (Isaiah)  the  prophet,  saying,  The 
land  of  Zabulun  and  the  land  of  Nephtalim,  by  the  way 
of  the  sea,  beyond  Jordan,  Galilee  of  the  Gentiles :  the 
people  which  sat  in  darkness  saw  great  light ;  and  to 
them  which  sat  in  the  region  and  shadow  of  death  light 
is  sprung  up." 

I  wonder  Matthew  has  not  made  the  cris-cros-row,  or 
the  Christ- cross-now  (I  know  not  how  the  priests  spell  it) 
into  a  prophecy.  He  might  as  well  have  done  this  as  cut 
out  these  unconnected  and  undescriptive  sentences  from 
the  place  they  stand  in,  and  dubbed  them  with  that  title. 

The  words,  however,  are  in  Isaiah,  chap.  ix.  ver.  i,  2, 
as  follows : 

' '  Nevertheless,  the  dimness  shall  not  be  such  as  was 
in  her  vexation,  when  at  the  first  he  lightly  afflicted 
the  land  of  Zebulun  and  the  land  of  Naphtali,  and  after- 
wards did  more  grievously  afflict  her  by  the  sea,  beyond 
Jordan,  in  Galilee  of  the  nations." 

All  this  relates  to  two  circumstances  that  had  already 
happened  at  the  time  these  words  in  Isiaah  were  written. 


2o6  AGE   OF  REASON. 

The  one,  where  the  land  of  Zebulun  and  the  land  or 
Naphtali  had  been  lightly  afflicted,  and  afterwards  more 
grievously,  by  the  way  of  the  sea. 

But  observe,  reader,  how  Matthew  has  falsified  the 
text.  He  begins  his  quotations  at  a  part  of  the  verse 
where  there  is  not  so  much  as  a  comma,  and  thereby 
cuts  oflf  every  thing  that  relafes  to  the  first  affliction. 
He  then  leaves  out  all  that  relates  to  the  second  affliction, 
and  by  this  means  leaves  out  ever>'  thing  that  makes 
the  verse  intelligible,  and  reduces  it  to  a  senseless 
skeleton  of  names  of  towns. 

To  bring  this  imposition  of  Matthew  clearly  and  im- 
mediately before  the  eye  of  the  reader,  I  will  repeat  the 
verse,  and  put  between  crutches  [  ]  the  words  he  has  left 
out,  and  put  in  Italics  those  he  has  preserved. 

[Nevertheless,  the  dimness  shall  not  be  such  as  was  in 
her  vexation  when  at  the  first  he  lightly  afflicted]  the 
land  of  Zebulun  and  the  land  of  Naphtali^  [and  did  after- 
wards more  grievously  afflict  her]  by  the  way  of  the  sea 
beyond  fordan  in  Galilee  of  the  nations. 

What  gross  imposition  is  it  to  gut,  as  the  phrase  is,  a 
verse  in  this  manner,  render  it  perfectly  senseless,  and 
then  puff"  it  off"  on  a  credulous  world  as  a  prophecy  !  I 
proceed  to  the  next  verse. 

Verse  2. — "The  people  that  walked  in  darkness  have 
seen  a  great  light ;  they  that  dwell  in  the  land  of  the 
shadow  of  death-,  upon  them  hath  the  light  shined. " 
All  this  is  historical  and  not  in  the  least  prophetical. 
The  whole  is  in  the  preter  tense ;  it  speaks  of  things  that 
had  been  accomplished  2X  the  time  the  words  were  written, 
and  not  of  things  to  be  accomplished  afterwards. 

As  then  the  passage  is  in  no  possible  sense  prophetical, 
nor  intended  to  be  so,  and  that  to  attempt  to  make  it  so, 
is  not  only  to  falsify  the  original,  but  to  commit  a  crim- 
inal imposition ;  it  is  a  matter  of  no  concern  to  us,  other- 
wise than  as  curiosity,  to  know  who  the  people  were  01 


>  AGE   OF   REASON.  207 

which  the  passage  speaks,  that  sat  in  darkness,  and  what 
the  light  was  that  had  shined  in  upon  them. 

If  we  look  into  the  preceding  chapter,  the  8th,  of  which 
the  9th  is  only  a  continuation,  we  shall  find  the  writer 
speaking,  at  the  19th  verse,  of  witches  and  wizards  who 
peep  about  and  mutter^  and  of  people  who  made  appli- 
cation to  them  ;  and  he  preaches  and  exhorts  them 
against  this  darksome  practice.  It  is  of  this  people,  and 
of  this  darksome  practice,  or  walking  in  darkness^  that 
he  is  speaking  at  the  second  verse  of  the  9th  chapter ; 
and  with  respect  to  the  light  that  had  shined  in  upon  them^ 
it  refers  entirely  to  his  own  ministry,  and  to  the  boldness 
of  it,  which  opposed  itself  to  that  of  the  witches  and 
wizards  who  peeped  about  and  muttered. 

Isaiah  is,  upon  the  whole,  a  wild,  disorderly  writer, 
preserving  in  general  no  clear  chain  of  perception  in  the 
arrangement  of  his  ideas,  and  consequently  producing 
no  defined  conclusions  from  them.  It  is  the  wildness 
of  his  style,  the  confusion  of  his  ideas,  and  the  ranting 
metaphors  he  employs,  that  have  afforded  so  many 
opportunities  to  priestcraft  in  some  cases,  and  to  super- 
stition in  others,  to  impose  those  defects  upon  the  world 
as  prophecies  of  Jesus  Christ.  Finding  no  direct  meaning 
in  them,  and  not  knowing  what  to  make  of  them,  and 
supposing  at  the  same  time  they  were  intended  to  have  a 
meaning,  they  supplied  the  defect  by  inventing  a  mean- 
ing of  their  own,  and  called  it  his.  I  have,  however,  in 
this  place  done  Isaiah  the  justice  to  rescue  him  from  the 
claws  of  Matthew,  who  has  torn  him  unmercifully  to 
pieces,  and  from  the  imposition  or  ignorance  of  priests 
and  commentators,  by  letting  Isaiah  speak  for  himself. 

If  the  words  walking  in  darkness  and  light  breaking 
in  could  in  any  case  be  applied  prophetically,  which  they 
cannot  be,  they  would  better  apply  to  the  times  we  now 
live  in  than  to  any  other.  The  world  has  walked  in 
darkness  for  eighteen  hundred  years,  both  as  to  religion 


2o8  AGE  OF  REASON.  * 

and  government,  and  it  is  only  since  the  American 
Revolution  began  that  light  has  broken  in.  The  belief 
oi  one  God^  whose  attributes  are  revealed  to  us  in  the 
book  or  scripture  of  the  creation  which  no  human  hand 
can  counterfeit  or  falsify,  and  not  in  the  written  or 
printed  book  which,  as  Matthew  has  shown,  can  be 
altered  or  falsified  by  ignorance  or  design,  is  now  making 
its  way  among  us :  and  as  to  government,  the  light  is 
already  gone  forth;  and  whilst  men  ought  to  be  careful 
not  to  be  blinded  by  the  excess  of  it,  as  at  a  certain  time 
in  France,  when  every  thing  was  Robesperrean  violence, 
they  ought  to  reverence,  and  even  to  adore  it,  with  all 
the  firmness  and  perseverance  that  true  wisdom  can 
inspire. 

I  pass  on  to  the  seventh  passage  called  a  prophecy  of 
Jesus  Christ, 

Matthew,  chap.  viii.  ver.  i6. — "When  the  evening 
was  come,  they  brought  unto  him  (Jesus)  many  that  were 
possessed  of  devils  :  and  he  cast  out  the  spirits  with  his 
word,  and  healed  all  that  were  sick :  that  it  might  be 
fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  Esaias  (Isaiah)  the  prophet, 
saying.  Himself  took  our  infirmities,  and  bare  our  sick- 
nesses. ' ' 

This  affair  of  people  being  possessed  by  devils,  and  of 
casting  them  out,  was  the  fable  of  the  day  when  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament  were  written.  It  had  not 
existence  at  any  other  time.  The  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  mention  no  such  thing ;  the  people  of  the 
present  day  know  of  no  such  thing ;  nor  does  the  history 
of  any  people  or  country  speak  of  such  a  thing.  It  starts 
upon  us  all  at  once  in  the  book  of  Matthew,  and  is  alto- 
gether an  invention  of  the  New  Testament  makers  and 
the  Christian  church.  The  book  of  Matthew  is  the  first 
book  where  the  word  devil  is  mentioned  as  being  in  the 
singular  number.  *     We  read  in  some  of  the  books  of  the 

*  The  word  devil  is  a  personification  of  the  wotd  evil. 


;*  AGE  OF  REASON.  209 

Old  Testament  of  things  called  familar  spirits,  the  sup- 
posed companions  of  people  called  witches  and  wizards. 
It  was  no  other  than  the  trick  of  pretended  conjurors  to 
obtain  money  from  credulous  and  igTiorant  people,  or  the 
fabricated  charge  of  superstitious  malignancy  against 
unfortunate  and  decrepid  old  age. 

But  the  idea  of  a  familar  spirit,  if  we  can  affix  any 
idea  to  the  term,  is  exceedingly  different  to  that  of  being 
possessed  by  a  devil.  In  the  one  case,  the  supposed 
familar  spirit  is  a  dexterous  agent,  that  comes  and  goes, 
and  does  as  he  is  bidden  :  in  the  other,  he  is  a  turbulent 
roaring  monster,  that  tears  and  tortures  the  body  into 
convulsions.  Reader,  whoever  thou  art,  put  thy  trust 
in  thy  creator,  make  use  of  the  reason  he  endowed  thee 
with,  and  cast  from  thee  all  such  fables. 

The  passage  alluded  to  by  Matthew,  (for  as  a  quotation 
it  is  false,)  is  in  Isaiah,  chap.  liii.  ver.  4,  which  is  as 
follows  : 

' '  Surely  he  (the  person  of  whom  Isaiah  is  speaking) 
hath  borne  our  g^efs  and  carried  our  sorrows. "  It  is  in 
the  preter  tense. 

Here  is  nothing  about  casting  out  devils,  nor  curing  of 
sicknesses.  The  passage,  therefore,  so  far  from  being  a 
prophecy  of  Christ,  is  not  even  applicable  as  a  circum- 
stance. 

Isaiah,  or  at  least  the  writer  of  the  book  that  bears  his 
name,  employs  the  whole  of  this  chapter,  the  53d,  in 
lamenting  the  suflferings  of  some  deceased  person,  of 
whom  he  speaks  very  pathetically.  It  is  a  monody  on 
the  death  of  a  friend  :  but  he  mentions  not  the  name  of 
the  person,  nor  gives  any  circumstance  of  him  by  which 
he  can  be  personally  known  ;  and  it  is  this  silence,  which 
is  evidence  of  nothing,  that  Matthew  has  laid  hold  of  to 
put  the  name  of  Christ  to  it ;  as  if  the  chiefs  of  the  Jews, 
whose  sorrows  were  then  great,  and  the  times  they  lived 
in  big  with  danger,  were  never  thinking  about  their  own 


2IO  AGE   OF   REASON. 

aflfairs,  nor  the  fate  of  their  own  friends,  but  were  contin- 
ually running  a  wild-goose  chase  into  futurity. 

To  make  a  monody  into  a  prophecy  is  an  absurdity. 
The  characters  and  circumstances  of  men,  even  in 
different  ages  of  the  world,  are  so  much  alike,  that  what 
is  said  of  one  may  with  propriety  be  said  of  many  ;  but 
this  fitness  does  not  make  the  passage  into  a  proph- 
ecy :  and  none  but  an  impostor  or  a  bigot  would  call 
it  so. 

Isaiah  in  deploring  the  hard  fate  and  loss  of  his  friend, 
mentions  nothing  of  him  but  what  the  human  lot  of  man 
is  subject  to.  All  the  cases  he  states  of  him — his  per- 
secutions, his  imprisonment,  his  patience  in  suffering, 
and  his  perseverance  in  principle,  are  all  within  the  line 
of  nature ;  they  belong  exclusively  to  none,  and  may 
with  justness  be  said  of  many.  But  if  Jesus  Christ  was 
the  person  the  church  represents  him  to  be,  that  which 
would  exclusively  apply  to  him  must  be  something  that 
could  not  apply  to  any  other  person  ;  something  beyond 
the  line  of  nature  ;  something  beyond  the  lot  of  mortal 
man  ;  and  there  are  no  such  expressions  in  this  chapter, 
nor  any  other  chapter  in  the  Old  Testament. 

It  is  not  exclusive  description  to  say  of  a  person,  as  it 
is  said  of  the  person  Isaiah  is  lamenting  in  this  chapter. 
He  was  oppressed^  and  he  was  afflicted^  yet  he  opened  not 
his  mouth  ;  he  is  brought  as  a  Lamb  to  the  slaughter^  and 
as  a  sheep  before  his  shearers  is  diimb^  so  he  opened  not 
his  mouth.  This  may  be  said  of  thousands  of  persons, 
who  have  suffered  oppressions  and  unjust  death  with 
patience,  silence,  and  perfect  resignation. 

Grotius,  whom  the  bishop  esteems  a  most  learned  man, 
and  who  certainly  was  so,  supposes  that  the  person  of 
whom  Isaiah  is  speaking  is  Jeremiah.  Grotius  is  led 
into  this  opinion,  from  the  agreement  there  is  between 
the  description  given  by  Isaiah,  and  the  case  of  Jeremiah, 
as  stated  in  the  book  that  bears  his  name.     If  Jeremiah 


AGE   OF    REASON.  211 

was  an  innocent  man,  and  not  a  traitor  in  the  interests 
of  Nebuchadnezzar,  when  Jerusalem  was  besieged,  his 
case  was  hard  ;  he  was  accused  by  his  countrymen,  was 
persecuted,  oppressed,  and  imprisoned ;  and  he  says  of 
himself,  (see  Jeremiah,  chap.  xi.  ver.  19),  "But  as  for  me, 
I  was  like  a  lamb  or  an  ox  that  is  brought  to  the 
slaughter." 

I  should  be  inclined  to  the  same  opinion  with  Grotius, 
had  Isaiah  lived  at  the  time  when  Jeremiah  underwent 
the  cruelties  of  which  he  speaks ;  but  Isaiah  died  about 
fifty  years  before :  and  it  is  of  a  person  of  his  own  time, 
whose  case  Isaiah  is  lamenting  in  the  chapter  in  question, 
and  which  imposition  and  bigotry,  more  than  seven 
hundred  years  afterwards,  perverted  into  a  prophecy  of  a 
person  they  call  Jesus  Christ. 

I  pass  on  to  the  eighth  passage  called  a  prophecy  of 
Jesus  Christ. 

Matthew,  chap.  xii.  ver.  14. — "Then  the  Pharisees 
went  out,  and  held  a  council  against  him,  how  they  might 
destroy  him.  But  when  Jesus  knew  it,  he  withdrew 
himself  from  thence ;  and  great  multitudes  followed  him, 
and  he  healed  them  all ;  and  charged  them  that  they 
should  not  make  him  known  : — That  it  might  be  fulfilled 
which  was  spoken  by  Esaias  (Isaiah)  the  prophet,  saying, 

"Behold  my  servant,  whom  I  have  chosen;  my  be- 
loved, in  whom  my  soul  is  well  pleased  :  I  will  put  my 
spirit  upon  him,  and  he  shall  show  judgment  to  the 
Gentiles.  He  shall  not  strive,  nor  cry ;  neither  shall 
any  man  hear  his  voice  in  the  streets.  A  bruised  reed 
shall  he  not  break,  and  smoking  flax  shall  he  not  quench, 
till  he  send  forth  judgment  unto  victory.  And  in  his 
name  shall  the  Gentiles  trust." 

In  the  first  place,  this  passage  hath  not  the  least  relation 
to  the  purpose  for  which  it  is  quoted. 

Matthew  says,  that  the  Pharisees  held  a  council  against 
Jesus  to  destroy  him  —  that  Jesus  withdrew  himself — 


212  AGE   OF   REASON. 

that  great  numbers  followed  him  —  that  he  healed  them 
— and  that  he  charged  them  not  to  make  him  known. 

But  the  passage  Matthew  has  quoted  as  being  fulfilled 
by  these  circumstances,  does  not  so  much  as  apply  to 
any  one  of  them.  It  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  Pharisees 
holding  a  council  to  destroy  Jesus  —  with  his  withdraw- 
ing himself — with  great  numbers  following  him  —  with 
his  healing  them  —  nor  with  his  charging  them  not  to 
make  him  known. 

The  purpose  for  which  the  passage  is  quoted,  and  the 
passage  itself,  are  as  remote  from  each  other  as  nothing 
from  something.  But  the  case  is,  that  people  have  been 
in  the  habit  of  reading  the  books  called  the  Bible  and 
Testament^  with  their  eyes  shut  and  their  senses  locked 
up,  that  the  most  stupid  inconsistencies  have  passed  on 
them  for  truth,  and  imposition  for  prophecy.  The  all- 
wise  Creator  hath  been  dishonored  by  being  made  the 
author  of  fable,  and  the  human  mind  degraded  by 
believing  it. 

In  this  passage,  as  in  that  last  mentioned,  the  name  of 
the  person  of  whom  the  passage  speaks  is  not  given,  and 
we  are  left  in  the  dark  respecting  him.  It  is  this  defect 
in  the  history  that  bigotry  and  imposition  have  laid  hold 
of  to  call  it  prophecy. 

Had  Isaiah  lived  in  the  time  of  Cyrus,  the  passage 
would  descriptively  apply  to  him.  As  king  of  Persia, 
his  authority  was  great  among  the  Gentiles,  and  it  is  of 
such  a  character  the  passage  speaks  ;  and  his  friendship 
to  the  Jews,  whom  he  liberated  from  captivity,  and  who 
might  then  be  compared  to  a  bruised  reed^  was  extensive. 
But  this  description  does  not  apply  to  Jesus  Christ,  who 
had  no  authority  among  the  Gentiles  ;  and  as  to  his  own 
countrymen,  figuratively  described  by  the  bruised  reed,  it 
was  they  who  crucified  him.  Neither  can  it  be  said  of 
him  that  he  did  not  cry,  and  that  his  voice  was  not  heard 
in  the  street.     As  a  preacher  it  was  his  business  to  be 


AGE  OF   REASON.  213 

heard,  and  we  are  told  that  he  travelled  about  the 
country  for  that  purpose,  Matthew  has  given  a  long 
sermon,  which  (if  his  authority  is  good,  but  which  is 
much  to  be  doubted,  since  he  imposes  so  much,)  Jesus 
preached  to  a  multitude  upon  a  mountain  ;  and  it  would 
be  a  quibble  to  say  that  a  mountain  is  not  a  street,  since 
it  is  a  place  equally  as  public. 

The  last  verse  in  the  passage  (the  4th)  as  it  stands  in 
Isaiah,  and  which  Matthew  has  not  quoted,  says,  "He 
shall  not  fail  nor  be  discouraged  till  he  have  set  judgment 
in  the  earth,  and  the  isles  shall  wait  for  his  law."  This 
also  applies  to  Cyrus.  He  was  not  discouraged,  he  did 
not  fail,  he  conquered  all  Babylon,  liberated  the  Jews 
and  established  laws.  But  this  cannot  be  said  of  Jesus 
Christ,  who,  in  the  passage  before  us,  according  to 
Matthew,  withdrew  himself  for  fear  of  the  Pharisees, 
and  charged  the  people  that  followed  him  not  to  make  it 
known  where  he  was ;  and  who,  according  to  other  parts 
of  the  Testament  was  continually  moving  from  place  to 
place  to  avoid  being  apprehended.  * 

*  In  the  second  part  of  the  Age  of  Reason,  I  have  shown  that  the  book  ascribed  to 
Isaiah  is  not  only  miscellaneous  as  to  matter,  but  as  to  authorship ;  that  there  are 
parts  in  it  which  could  not  be  written  by  Isaiah,  because  they  speak  of  things  one 
hundred  and  fifty  years  after  he  was  dead.  The  instance  I  have  given  of  this,  in  that 
work,  corresponds  with  the  subject  I  am  upon,  at  least  a  little  better  than  Matthew's 
introduction  and  his  quotation. 

Isaiah  lived,  the  latter  part  of  his  life,  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah,  and  it  was  about  one 
hundred  and  fifty  years  from  the  death  of  Hezekiah  to  the  first  year  of  the  reign  of 
Cyrus,  when  Cyrus  published  a  proclamation  which  is  given  in  the  first  chapter  of  the 
book  of  Ezra,  for  the  return  of  the  Jews  to  Jerusalem.  It  cannot  be  doubted,  at  least 
it  ought  not  to  be  doubted,  that  the  Jews  would  feel  an  affectionate  gratitude  for  this 
act  of  benevolent  justice  ;  and  it  is  natural  they  would  express  that  gratitude  in  the 
-customary  style,  bombastical  and  hyperbolical  as  it  was,  which  they  used  on  extra- 
ordinary occasions,  and  which  was,  and  still  is,  in  practice  with  all  the  eastern  nations. 

The  instance  to  which  I  refer,  and  which  is  given  in  the  second  part  of  the  Age  0/ 
Reason,  is  the  last  verse  of  the  44th  chapter,  and  the  beginning  of  the  45th  — in  these 
words:  That  saith  of  Cyrus,  He  is  my  shepherd,  and  shall  perforin  all  my  pleasure: 
even  saying  to  Jerusalem,  Thou  shalt  be  built ;  and  to  the  temple,  Thy  foundation 
shall  be  laid.  Thus  saith  the  Lord  to  his  annointed,  to  Cyrus,  whose  right  hand  I 
have  holden.  to  subdue  nations  before  him  :  and  I  will  loose  the  loins  of  kings,  to  open 
before  him  the  two-leaved  gates,  and  the  gates  shall  not  be  shut. 

This  complimentary  address  is  in  the  present  tense,  which  shows  that  the  things  of 
which  Isaiah  speaks  were  in  existence  at  the  time  of  writing  it ;  and,  consequently, 
that  the  author  must  have  been  at  least  one  hundred  and  fifty  years  later  than   Isaiah, 


214  AGE   OF   REASON. 

But  it  is  immaterial  to  us,  at  this  distance  of  time,  to 
know  who  the  person  was  :  it  is  sufficieut  to  the  purpose 
I  am  upon,  that  of  detecting  fraud  and  falsehood,  to 
know  who  it  was  not,  and  to  show  it  was  not  the  person 
called  Jesus  Christ. 

I  pass  on  to  the  ninth  passage  called  a  prophecy  of 
Jesus  Christ. 

Matthew,  chap.  xxi.  ver.  i,  "And  when  they  drew 
nigh  unto  Jerusalem,  and  were  come  to  Bethphage,  unto 
the  mount  of  Olives,  then  sent  Jesus  two  disciples, 
saying  unto  them,  Go  into  the  village  over  against  you, 
and  straightway  ye  shall  find  an  ass  tied,  and  a  colt  with 
her :  loose  them^  and  bring  them  unto  me.  And  if  any 
man  say  ought  unto  you,  ye  shall  say.  The  Lord  hath 
need  of  them  ;  and  straightway  he  will  send  them. 

"All  this  was  done  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which 
was  spoken  by  the  prophet,  saying.  Tell  ye  the  daughter 
of  Sion^  Behold^  thy  king  cometh  unto  thee^  meek^  and 
sitting  upon  an  ass,  and  a  colt  the  foal  of  an  ass.'*'' 

Poor  ass !  let  it  be  some  consolation  amidst  all  thy 
sufferings,  that  if  the  heathen  world  erected  a  bear  into 
a  constellation,  the  Christian  world  has  elevated  thee 
into  a  prophecy. 

This  passage  is  in  Zechariah,  chap.  ix.  ver.  9,  and  is 
one  of  the  whims  of  friend  Zechariah  to  congratulate  his 
countrymen,  who  were  then  returning  from  their  captiv- 
ity in  Babylon,  and  himself  with  them,  to  Jerusalem. 
It  has  no  concern  with  any  other  subject.     It  is  strange 

and  that  the  book  which  bears  his  name  is  a  compilation.  The  Proverbs  called 
Solomon's,  and  the  Psalms  called  David's,  are  of  the  same  kind.  The  two  last  verses 
of  the  second  book  of  Chronicles,  and  three  first  verses  of  the  first  chapter  of  Ezra, 
are  word  for  word  the  same;  which  show  that  the  compilers  of  the  Bible  mixed  the 
writnigs  of  different  authors  together,  and  put  them  under  some  common  head. 

As  we  have  here  an  instance,  in  the  44th  and  45th  chapters,  of  the  introduction  of  the 
name  of  Cyrus  into  a  book  to  which  it  cannot  belong,  it  affords  good  ground  to  con- 
clude, that  the  passage  in  the  42d  chapter,  in  which  the  character  of  Cyrus  is  given 
without  his  name,  has  been  introduced  in  like  manner,  and  that  the  person  there 
spoken  of  is  Cyrus 


AGE  OF   RKASON.  215 

that  apostles,  priests,  and  coinineutators,  never  pennit, 
or  never  snppose  the  Jews  to  be  speaking  of  their  own 
affairs.  Ever>'  thing  in  the  Jewish  books  is  perverted 
and  distorted  into  meanings  never  intended  by  the 
writers.  Even  the  poor  ass  must  not  be  a  Jew-ass,  but 
a  Christian-ass.  I  wonder  they  did  not  make  an  apostle 
of  him,  or  a  bishop,  or  at  least  make  him  speak  and 
prophecy.  He  could  have  lifted  up  his  voice  as  loud  as 
any  of  them. 

Zechariah,  in  the  first  chapter  of  his  book,  indulges 
himself  in  several  wHims  on  the  joy  of  getting  back  to 
Jerusalem.  He  says  at  the  8th  verse,  "  I  saw  by  night, 
(Zechariah  was  a  sharp-sighted  seer)  and  behold  a  man 
riding  on  a  red  horse^  (yes,  reader,  a  red  horse)  and  he 
stood  among  the  myrtle  trees  that  were  in  the  bottom  ; 
and  behind  him  were  there  red  horses^  speckled  and 
white^  He  says  nothing  about  green  horses,  nor  blue 
horses,  perhaps  because  it  is  difficult  to  distinguish  green 
from  blue  by  night,  but  a  Christian  can  have  no  doubt 
they  were  there,  because  '  ^ faith  is  the  evidence  of  things 
not  seen.'*'' 

Zechariah  then  introduces  an  angel  among  his  horses, 
hut  he  does  not  tell  us  what  color  the  angel  was  of, 
whether  black  or  white  ;  whether  he  came  to  buy  horses, 
or  only  to  look  at  them  as  curiosities,  for  certainly  they 
were  of  that  kind.  Be  this,  however,  as  it  may,  he 
enters  into  conversation  with  this  angel,  on  the  joyful 
affair  of  getting  back  to  Jerusalem,  and  he  saith  at  the 
i6th  verse — "Therefore,  thus  saith  the  Lord:  I  AM 
RETURNED  to  Jerusalem  with  mercies ;  my  house 
shall  be  built  in  it,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts,  and  a  line 
shall  be  stretched  forth  upon  Jerusalem. "  An  expression 
signifying  the  rebuilding  the  city. 

All  this,  whimsical  and  imaginary  as  it  is,  sufficiently 
proves  that  it  was  the  entry  of  the  Jews  into  Jerusalem 
from  captivity,  and  not  the  entry  of  Jesus  Christ  seven 


2l6  AGE   OF   REASON. 

hundred  years  afterwards,  that  is  the  subject  upon  which 
Zechariah  is  always  speaking. 

As  to  the  expression  of  riding  upon  an  ass,  which  com- 
mentators represent  as  a  sign  of  humility  in  Jesus  Christ, 
the  case  is,  he  never  was  so  well  mounted  before.  The 
asses  of  those  countries  are  large  and  well  proportioned, 
and  were  anciently  the  chief  of  riding  animals.  Their 
beasts  of  burden,  and  which  served  also  for  the  convey- 
ance of  the  poor,  were  camels  and  dromedaries.  We 
read  in  Judges,  chap.  x.  ver.  4,  that  "Jair  (one  of  the 
judges  of  Israel)  had  thirty  sons  that  rode  on  thirty-ass  colts^ 
and  they  had  thirty  cities. "  But  commentators  distort 
every  thing. 

There  is  besides  very  reasonable  grounds  to  conclude, 
that  this  story  of  Jesus  riding  publicly  into  Jerusalem, 
accompanied,  as  it  is  said  in  Matthew,  chap,  xxi.,  8th 
and  9th  verses,  by  a  great  multitude,  shouting  and  re- 
joicing, and  spreading  their  garments  by  the  way,  is 
altogether  a  story  destitute  of  truth. 

In  the  last  passage  called  a  prophecy  that  I  examined, 
Jesus  is  represented  as  withdrawing,  that  is,  running 
away,  and  concealing  himself  for  fear  of  being  appre- 
hended, and  charging  the  people  that  were  with  him  not 
to  make  him  known.  No  new  circumstances  had  arisen 
in  the  interim  to  change  his  condition  for  the  better ; 
yet  here  he  is  represented  as  making  his  public  entry 
into  the  same  city  from  which  he  had  fled  for  safety. 
The  two  cases  contradict  each  other  so  much,  that  if 
both  are  not  false,  one  of  them  at  least  can  scarcely  be 
true.  For  my  own  part,  I  do  not  believe  there  is  one 
word  of  historical  truth  in  the  whole  book.  I  look  upon 
it  at  best  to  be  a  romance  ;  the  principal  personage  of 
which  is  an  imaginary  or  allegorical  character,  founded 
upon  some  tale,  and  in  which  the  moral  is  in  many  parts 
good  and  the  narrative  part  very  badly  and  blunderingly 
written. 


» 


AGE   OF   REASON.  217 

I  pass  on  to  the  tenth  passage  called  a  prophecy  of 
Jesus  Christ. 

Matthew,  chap.  xxvi.  ver.  51,  "And  behold,  one  of 
them  which  were  with  Jesus  (meaning  Peter)  stretched 
out  his  hand  and  drew  his  sword,  and  struck  a  servant  of 
the  high  priest,  and  smote  off  his  ear.  Then  said  Jesus 
unto  him,  Put  up  again  thy  sword  into  his  place,  for  all 
they  that  take  the  sword  shall  perish  with  the  sword. 
Thinkest  thou  that  I  cannot  now  pray  to  my  Father,  and 
he  shall  presently  give  me  more  than  twelve  legions  of 
angels?  But  how  then  shall  the  Scriptures  be  fulfilled, 
that  thus  it  must  be?  In  that  same  hour  said  Jesus  to 
the  multitudes.  Are  ye  come  out  as  against  a  thief  with 
swords  and  staves  for  to  take  me?  I  sat  daily  with  you 
teaching  in  the  temple,  and  ye  laid  no  hold  on  me.  But 
all  this  was  done,  that  the  Scriptures  of  the  prophets 
might  be  fulfilled." 

This  loose  and  general  manner  of  speaking  admits 
neither  of  detection  nor  of  proof  Here  is  no  quotation 
given,  nor  the  name  of  any  Bible  author  mentioned,  to 
which  reference  can  be  had. 

There  are,  however,  some  high  improbabilities  against 
the  truth  of  the  account. 

First.  It  is  not  probable  that  the  Jews,  who  were  then 
a  conquered  people,  and  under  subjection  to  the  Romans, 
should  be  permitted  to  wear  swords. 

Secondly.  If  Peter  had  attacked  the  servant  of  the 
high-priest  and  cut  off  his  ear,  he  would  have  been  im- 
mediately taken  up  by  the  guard  that  took  up  his 
master,  and  sent  to  prison  with  him. 

Thirdly.  What  sort  of  disciples  and  preaching  apostles 
must  those  of  Christ  have  been  that  wore  swords? 

Fourthly.  This  scene  is  represented  to  have  taken 
place  the  same  evening  of  what  is  called  the  Lord's 
Supper,  which  makes,  according  to  the  ceremony  of  it, 
the  inconsistency  of  wearing  swords  the  greater. 


2l8  AGE   OF   REASON. 

I  pass  on  to  the  eleventh  passage  called  a  prophecy  of 
Jesus  Christ, 

Matthew,  chap,  xxvii.  ver,  3,  "Then  Judas,  which 
had  betrayed  him,  when  he  saw  that  he  was  condemned, 
repented  himself,  and  brought  again  the  thirty  pieces  of 
silver  to  the  chief  priests  and  elders,  saying,  I  have 
sinned  in  that  I  have  betrayed  the  innocent  blood.  And 
they  said,  What  is  that  to  us?  see  thou  to  that.  And  he 
cast  down  the  pieces  of  silver  in  the  temple,  and  departed, 
and  went  and  hanged  himself  And  the  chief  priests 
took  the  silver  pieces,  and  said,  It  is  not  lawful  for  to  put 
them  into  the  treasury,  because  it  is  the  price  of  blood. 
And  they  took  counsel,  and  bought  with  them  the  potter's 
field,  to  bury  strangers  in.  Wherefore  that  field  was 
called.  The  field  of  blood  unto  this  day.  Then  was  ful- 
filled that  which  was  spoken  by  Jeremy  the  prophet, 
saying,  And  they  took  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver,  the 
price  of  him  that  was  valued,  whom  they  of  the  children, 
of  Israel  did  value ;  and  gave  them  for  the  potter's  field, 
as  the  Lord  appointed  me. ' ' 

This  is  a  most  bare-faced  piece  of  imposition.  The 
passage  in  Jeremiah  which  speaks  of  the  purchase  of  a 
field,  has  no  more  to  do  with  the  case  to  which  Matthew 
applies  it,  than  it  has  to  do  with  the  purchase  of  lands 
in  America.     I  will  recite  the  whole  passage  : 

Jeremiah,  chap,  xxxii.  ver.  6,  "And  Jeremiah  said. 
The  word  of  the  Lord  came  unto  me,  saying.  Behold, 
Hanameel  the  son  of  Shallum  thine  uncle,  shall  come 
unto  thee,  saying.  Buy  thee  my  field  that  is  in  x\nathoth, 
for  the  right  of  redemption  is  thine  to  buy  it.  So  Hana- 
meel mine  uncle's  son  came  to  me  in  the  court  of  the 
prison,  according  to  the  word  of  the  Lord,  and  said  unto 
me.  Buy  my  field,  I  pray  thee,  that  is  in  Anathoth,  which 
is  in  the  country  of  Benjamin  ;  for  the  right  of  inheritance 
is  thine,  and  the  redemption  is  thine  :  buy  it  for  thyself. 
Then  I  knew  that  this  ivas  the  word  of  the  Lord.     And 


AGE  OF   REASON.  219 

I  bought  the  field  of  Hanameel  miue  uncle's  son,  that 
was  in  Anathoth,  and  weighed  him  the  money,  even 
seventeen  shekels  of  silver.  And  I  subscribed  the  evi- 
dence, and  sealed  it,  and  took  witnesses,  and  weighed 
him  the  money  in  the  balances.  So  I  took  the  evidence 
of  the  purchase,  both  that  which  was  sealed  according  to 
the  law  and  custom,  and  that  which  was  open ;  and  I 
gave  the  evidence  of  the  purchase  unto  Baruch  the  son 
of  Neriah,  the  son  of  Maaseiah,  in  the  sight  of  Hanameel 
mine  uncle's  son,  and  in  tlie  presence  of  the  witnesses 
that  subscribed  the  book  of  the  purchase,  before  all  the 
Jews  that  sat  in  the  court  of  the  prison — and  I  charged 
Baruch  before  them  saying,  Thus  said  the  Lord  of  hosts, 
the  God  of  Israel ;  take  those  evidences,  this  evidence  of 
the  purchase,  both  which  is  sealed,  and  this  evidence 
which  is  open  ;  and  put  them  in  an  earthen  vessel,  that 
they  may  continue  many  days — for  thus  saith  the  Lord 
of  hosts,  the  God  of  Israel ;  houses  and  fields  and  vine- 
yards shall  be  possessed  again  in  this  land." 

I  forbear  making  any  remark  on  this  abominable  im- 
position of  Matthew.  The  thing  glaringly  speaks  for 
itself.  It  is  priests  and  commentators  that  I  rather  ought 
to  censure,  for  having  preached  falsehood  so  long,  and 
kept  people  in  darkness  with  respect  to  those  impositions. 
I  am  not  contending  with  these  men  upon  points  of 
doctrine,  for  I  know  that  sophistry  has  always  a  city  of 
refuge.  I  am  speaking  of  facts  :  for  wherever  the  thing 
called  a  fact  is  a  falsehood,  the  faith  founded  upon  it 
is  delusion,  and  the  doctrine  raised  upon  it  not  true. 
Ah,  reader,  put  thy  trust  in  thy  Creator,  and  thou  wilt 
be  safe ;  but  if  thou  trustest  to  the  book  called  the 
Scriptures,  thou  trustest  to  the  rotten  stafi"  of  fable  and 
falsehood.     But  I  return  to  my  subject. 

There  is,  among  the  whims  and  reveries  of  Zechariah, 
mention  made  of  thirty  pieces  of  silver  given  to  a  potter. 
They  can  hardly  have  been  so  stupid  as  to  mistake  a 


220  AGE  OF   REASON. 

potter  for  a  field  ;  and  if  they  had,  the  passage  in  Zecha- 
riah  has  no  more  to  do  with  Jesus,  Judas,  and  the  field 
to  bury  strangers  in,  than  that  already  quoted.  I  will 
recite  the  passage. 

Zechariah,  chap.  xi.  ver.  7,  "And  I  will  feed  the  flock 
of  slaughter,  even  you,  O  poor  of  the  flock.  And  I  took 
unto  me  two  staves ;  the  one  I  called  Beauty^  and  the 
other  I  called  Bands^  and  I  fed  the  flock.  Three  shep- 
herds also  I  cut  off"  in  one  month  ;  and  my  soul  loathed 
them,  and  their  souls  also  abhorred  me.  Then  said  I, 
I  will  not  feed  you,  that  that  dieth,  let  it  die ;  and  that 
that  is  to  be  cut  off,  let  it  be  cut  off;  and  let  the  rest  eat 
every  one  the  flesh  of  another.  And  I  took  my  staff" 
even  Beauty^  and  cut  it  asunder,  that  I  might  break  my 
covenant  which  I  had  made  with  all  the  people.  And  it 
was  broken  in  that  day  ;  and  so  the  poor  of  the  flock  that 
waited  upon  me  knew  that  it  was  the  word  of  the  Lord. 

' '  And  I  said  unto  them,  if  ye  think  good  g^ve  me  my 
price ;  and  if  not,  forbear.  So  they  weighed  for  my 
price  \\\\x\.y  pieces  of  silver.  And  the  Lord  said  unto  me, 
cast  it  unto  the  potter :  a  goodly  price  that  I  was  prised 
at  of  them.  And  I  took  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver,  and 
cast  them  to  the  potter  in  the  house  of  the  Lord. 

"Then  I  cut  asunder  mine  other  staff,  even  Bands ^ 
that  I  might  break  the  brotherhood  between  Judah  and 
Israel."* 

*  Whiston,  in  his  Essay  on  the  Old  Testament,  says,  that  the  passage  of  Zechariah 
of  which  I  have  spoken,  was,  in  the  copies  of  the  Bible  of  the  first  century,  in  the  book 
of  Jeremiah,  from  whence,  says  he,  it  was  taken  and  inserted,  without  coherence,  in 
that  of  Zechariah  Well,  let  it  be  so,  it  does  not  make  the  case  a  whit  the  better  for  the 
New  Testament ;  but  it  makes  the  case  a  great  deal  the  worse  for  the  Old.  Because 
it  shows,  as  I  have  mentioned  respecting  some  passages  in  a  book  ascribed  to  Isaiah,^ 
that  the  works  of  different  authors  have  been  so  mixed  and  confounded  together,  they 
cannot  now  be  discriminated,  except  where  they  are  historical,  chronological,  or 
biographical,  as  is  the  interpolation  in  Isaiah.  It  is  the  name  of  Cyrus,  inserted  where 
it  could  not  be  inserted,  as  he  was  not  in  existence  till  150  years  after  the  time  of  Isaiah, 
that  detects  the  interpolation  and  the  blunder  with  it. 

Whiston  was  a  man  of  great  literary  learning,  and,  what  is  of  much  higher  degree, 
of  deep  scientific  learning.  He  was  one  of  the  best  and  most  celebrated  mathemati- 
cians of  his  time,  for  which  he  was  made  Professor  of  Mathematics  of  the  University  oi 
Cambridge.     He  wrote  so  much  in  defence  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  of  what  he  calls 


AGE  OF   REASON.  221 

There  is  no  making  either  head  or  tail  of  this  inco- 
herent gibberish.  His  two  staves,  one  called  Beauty  and 
the  other  Bands^  is  so  much  like  a  fairy  tale,  that  I  doubt 
if  it  had  any  other  origin.  There  is,  however,  no  part 
that  has  the  least  relation  to  the  case  stated  in  Matthew  ; 
on  the  contrary,  it  is  the  reverse  of  it.  Here  the  thirty 
^?m\f  of  silver,  whatever  it  was  for,  is  called  a  goodly 
price ;  it  was  as  much  as  the  thing  was  worth,  and, 
according  to  the  language  of  the  day,  was  approved  of  by 
the  Lord,  and  the  money  given  to  the  potter  in  the 
house  of  the  Lord.  In  the  case  of  Jesus  and  Judas  as 
stated  in  Matthew,  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver  were  the 
price  of  blood  ;  the  transaction  was  condemned  by  the 
Lord,  and  the  money,  when  refunded,  was  refused  ad- 
mittance into  the  treasury.  Every  thing  in  the  two  cases 
is  the  reverse  of  each  other. 

Besides  this,  a  very  different  and  direct  contrary 
account  to  that  of  Matthew,  is  given  of  the  affair  of  Judas, 
in  the  book  called  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles:  according  to 
that  book  the  case  is,  that  so  far  from  Judas  repenting 
and  returning  the  money,  and  the  high-priest  buying  a 
field  with  it  to  bury  strangers  in,  Judas  kept  the  money 
and  bought  a  field  with  it  for  himself;  and  instead  of 
hanging  himself  as  Matthew  says,  that  he  fell  headlong 
and  burst  asunder. 

Some  commentators  endeavor  to  get  over  one  part  of 
the  contradiction  by  ridiculously  supposing  that  Judas 
hanged  himself  first  and  the  rope  broke. 

prophecies  of  Jesus  Christ,  that  at  least  he  began  to  suspect  the  truth  of  the  Scriptures 
and  wrote  against  them  ;  for  it  is  only  those  who  examine  them,  that  see  the  imposi- 
tion.   Those  who  believe  them  most  are  those  who  know  least  about  them. 

Whiston,  after  writing  so  much  in  defence  of  the  Scriptures,  was  at  last  prosecuted 
for  writing  against  them.  It  was  this  that  gave  occasion  to  Swifl  in  his  ludicrous 
epigram  on  Ditton  and  Whiston,  each  of  which  set  up  to  find  out  the  longitude,  to  call 
the  one  good  master  Dillon,  and  the  other  wicked  IVtll  iVhiston.  But  as  Swift  was  a 
great  associate  with  the  Freethinkers  of  those  days,  such  as  Bolinbroke,  Pope,  and 
others,  who  did  not  believe  the  books  called  the  Scriptures,  there  is  no  certainty 
whether  he  wittily  called  him  ivickfd  for  defending  the  Scriptures,  or  for  writing 
against  them.    The  known  character  of  Swift  decides  for  the  former. 


222  AGE   OF    REASON. 

Acts,  chap.  I.  ver.  i6,  "Men  and  brethren,  this 
Scripture  must  needs  have  been  fulfilled,  which  the 
Holy  Ghost  by  the  mouth  of  David  spake  before  con- 
cerning Judas,  which  was  guide  to  them  that  took  Jesus. 
(David  says  not  a  word  about  Judas)  ver.  17,  for  he 
(Judas)  was  numbered  with  us,  and  had  obtained  part  of 
this  ministry. 

Ver.  18,  "Now  this  man  purchased  a  field  with  the 
reward  of  iniquity,  and  falling  headlong  he  burst  asunder 
in  the  midst,  and  his  bowels  gushed  out."  Is  it  not  a 
species  of  blasphemy  to  call  the  New  Testament  revealed 
religion^  when  we  see  in  it  such  contradictions  and 
absurdities  ? 

I  pass  on  to  the  twelfth  passage  called  a  prophecy  of 
Jesus  Christ. 

Matthew,  chap,  xxvii.,  ver.  35,  "And  they  crucified 
him,  and  parted  his  garments,  casting  lots  ;  that  it 
might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  the  prophet. 
They  parted  my  garments  amo7ig  them^  and  upon  my 
vesture  did  they  cast  lots.''''  This  expression  is  in  the 
22nd  Psalm,  ver.  18.  The  writer  of  that  Psalm  (who- 
ever he  was,  for  the  Psalms  are  a  collection,  and  not  the 
work  of  one  man)  is  speaking  of  himself  and  of  his  own 
case,  and  not  that  of  another.  He  begins  this  Psalm 
with  the  words  which  the  New  Testament  writers  as- 
cribed to  Jesus  Christ — "My  God,  my  God,  why  hast 
thou  forsaken  me?"  — words  which  might  be  uttered  by 
a  complaining  man  without  any  great  impropriety, 
but  very  improperly  from  the  mouth  of  a  reputed 
God. 

The  picture  which  the  writer  draws  of  his  own  situa- 
tion in  this  Psalm  is  gloomy  enough.  He  is  not 
prophecying  but  complaining  of  his  own  hard  case.  He 
represents  himself  as  surrounded  by  enemies  and  beset 
by  persecutions  of  every  kind  ;  and  by  way  of  showing 
the  inveteracy  of  his  persecutors,  he  says,  at  the  i8th 


AGE   OF    REASON.  22?, 

verse,  Tkey  parted  my  garments  among  them^  and  cast 
lots  upon  fny  vesture. 

The  expression  is  in  the  present  tense  ;  and  is  the 
the  same  as  to  say,  They  pursue  me  even  to  the  clothes 
upon  my  back,  and  dispute  how  they  shall  divide  them. 
Besides,  the  word  vesture  does  not  always  mean  clothing 
of  any  kind,  but  property^  or  rather  the  admitting  a 
man  to  or  investing\\\ra  with  property  ;  and  as  it  is  used 
in  this  Psalm  distinct  from  the  word  garment,  it  appears 
to  be  used  in  this  sense.  But  Jesus  had  no  property  ; 
for  they  make  him  say  of  himself,  The  foxes  have  holeSy 
and  the  birds  of  the  air  have  nests^  but  the  Son  of  man 
hath  not  where  to  lay  his  head. 

But  be  this  as  it  may,  if  we  permit  ourselves  to  sup- 
pose the  Almighty  would  condescend  to  tell,  by  what  is 
called  the  spirit  of  prophecy,  what  could  come  to  pass  in 
some  future  age  of  the  world,  it  is  an  injury  to  our  own 
faculties,  and  to  our  ideas  of  his  greatness,  to  imagine  it 
would  be  about  an  old  coat,  or  an  old  pair  of  breeches, 
or  about  any  thing  which  the  common  accidents  of  life, 
or  the  quarrels  that  attend  it,  exhibit  every  day. 

That  which  is  within  the  power  of  man  to  do,  or  in 
his  will  not  to  do,  is  not  a  subject  for  prophecy  even  if 
there  were  such  a  thing,  because  it  cannot  carry  with  it 
any  evidence  of  divine  power  or  divine  interposition. 
The  ways  of  God  are  not  the  ways  of  men.  That  which 
an  Almighty  Power  performs  or  wills,  is  not  within  the 
circle  of  human  power  to  do  or  to  control.  But  any 
executioner  and  his  assistants  might  quarrel  about 
dividing  the  garments  of  a  sufferer,  or  divide  them  with- 
out quarrelling,  and  by  that  means  fulfill  the  thing 
called  a  prophecy,  or  set  it  aside. 

In  the  passages  before  examined,  I  have  exposed  the 
falsehood  of  them.  In  this  I  exhibit  its  degrading 
meanness,  as  an  insult  to  the  Creator,  and  an  injury  to 
human  reason. 


224  A^^  OP   REASON. 

Here  end  the  passages  called  prophecies  by  Mat- 
thew. 

Matthew  concludes  his  book  by  saying,  that  when 
Christ  expired  on  the  cross,  the  rocks  rent,  the  graves 
opened,  and  the  bodies  of  many  of  the  saints  arose  ;  and 
Mark  says,  there  was  darkness  over  the  land  from  the 
sixth  hour  until  the  ninth.  They  produce  no  prophecy 
for  this  ;  but  had  these  things  been  facts,  they  would 
bave  been  a  proper  subject  for  prophecy,  because  none 
but  an  Almighty  Power  could  have  inspired  a  fore- 
knowledge of  them,  and  afterwards  fulfilled  them. 
Since,  then,  there  is  no  such  prophecy,  but  a  pretended 
prophecy  of  an  old  coat,  the  proper  deduction  is,  there 
were  no  such  things,  and  that  the  book  of  Matthew  is 
fable  and  falsehood. 

I  pass  on  to  the  book  called  the  Gospel  according  to 
St.  Mark. 


THE  BOOK  OF   MARK. 

THERE  are  but  few  passages  in  Mark  called  prophe- 
cies ;  and  but  few  in  Luke  and  John.     Such  as 
there  are  I  shall  examine,  and  also  such  other 
passages  as  interfere  with  those  cited  by  Matthew. 

Mark  begins  his  book  by  a  passage  which  he  puts  in 
the  shape  of  a  prophecy.  Mark,  chap,  i.,  ver.  i,  "  The 
beginning  of  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God  ; 
as  it  is  written  in  the  prophets,  Behold^  I  send  my  mes- 
senger before  thy  face  ^  which  shall  prepare  thy  way  before 
iheey  [Malachi,  chap,  iii.,  ver.  i.]  The  passage  in 
the  original  is  in  the  first  person.  Mark  makes  this 
passage  to  be  a  prophecy  of  John  the  Baptist,  said  by  the 
Church  to  be  a  forerunner  of  Jesus  Christ.  But  if  we 
attend  to  the  verses  that   follow  this  expression,  as  it 


AGE   OF   REASON.  225 

stands  in  Malachi,  and  to  the  first  and  fifth  verses  of  the 
next  chapter,  we  shall  see  that  this  application  of  it  is 
erroneons  and  false. 

Malachi  having  said  at  the  first  verse,  "  fiehold,  I  will 
send  my  messenger,  and  he  shall  prepare  the  way  before 
me,"  says  at  the  second  verse,  "  But  who  may  abide  the 
day  of  his  coming  ?  and  who  shall  stand  when  he  ap- 
peareth?  for  he  is  like  a  refiner's  fire,  and  like  fuller's 
soap. ' ' 

This  description  can  have  no  reference  to  the  birth  of 
Jesus  Christ,  and  consequently  none  to  John  the  Baptist. 
It  is  a  scene  of  fear  and  terror  that  is  here  described,  and 
the  birth  of  Christ  is  always  spoken  of  as  a  time  of  joy 
and  glad  tidings. 

Malachi,  continuing  to  speak  on  the  same  subject, 
explains  in  the  n«xt  chapter  what  the  scene  is  of  which 
he  speaks  in  the  verses  above  quoted,  and  who  the  person 
is  whom  he  calls  the  messenger. 

"Behold,"  says  he,  chap,  iv.,  ver.  i,  "the  day 
Cometh,  that  shall  burn  as  an  oven  ;  and  all  the  proud, 
yea,  and  all  that  do  wickedly,  shall  be  stubble  ;  and  the 
day  that  cometh  shall  burn  them  up,  saith  the  Lord  of 
hosts,  that  it  shall  leave  them  neither  root  nor  branch." 

Ver.  5,  "  Behold  I  will  send  you  Elijah  the  prophet 
before  the  coming  of  the  great  and  dreadful  day  of  the 
Lord." 

By  what  right,  or  by  what  imposition  or  ignorance 
Mark  has  made  Elijah  into  John  the  Baptist,  and 
Malachi 's  description  of  the  day  of  judgment  into  the 
birth-day  of  Christ,  I  leave  to  the  bishop  to  settle. 

Mark,  in  the  second  and  third  verses  of  his  first  chap- 
ter, confounds  two  passages  together,  taken  from  differ- 
ent books  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  second  verse, 
' '  Behold  I  send  my  messenger  before  thy  face^  which 
shall  prepare  thy  way  before  thee  ^'''  is  taken,  as  I  have 
said   before,   from  Malachi.      The    third   verse,    which 


226  AGE   OF   REASON. 

says,  ' '  The  voice  of  one  crying  in  the  wilderness^  Pre- 
pare ye  the  way  of  the  Lord^  make  his  paths  straight^'''* 
is  not  in  Malachi,  but  in  Isaiah,  chap,  xl.,  ver.  3. 
Whiston  says,  that  both  these  verses  were  originally  in 
Isaiah.  If  so,  it  is  another  instance  of  the  disordered 
state  of  the  Bible,  and  corroborates  what  I  have  said  with 
respect  to  the  name  and  description  of  Cynis  being  in 
the  book  of  Isaiah,  to  which  it  cannot  chronologically 
belong. 

The  words  in  Isaiah,  chap,  xi  ,  ver.  3,  ' '  The  voice  of 
him  that  crieth  in  the  wilderness^  Prepare  ye  the  way 
of  the  Lord^  make  his  path  straight^  are  in  the  present 
tense,  and  consequently  not  predictive.  It  is  one  of 
those  rhetorical  figures  which  the  Old  Testament  authors 
frequently  used.  That  it  is  merely  rhetorical  and  met- 
aphorical, may  be  seen  at  the  6th  verse':  "  And  the  voice 
said.  Cry,  and  he  said,  What  shall  I  cry?  All  flesh  is 
grass.'*''  This  is  evidently  nothing  but  a  figure;  for 
flesh  is  not  grass,  otherwise  than  a  figure  or  metaphor, 
where  one  thing  is  put  for  another.  Besides  which,  the 
whole  passage  is  too  general  and  declamatory  to  be 
applied  exclusively  to  any  particular  person  or  purpose. 

I  pass  on  to  the  eleventh  chapter. 

In  this  chapter  Mark  speaks  of  Christ  riding  inta 
Jerusalem  upon  a  colt,  but  he  does  not  make  it  the  ac- 
complishment of  a  prophecy,  as  Matthew  has  done  ;  for 
he  says  nothing  about  a  prophecy.  Instead  of  which, 
he  goes  on  the  other  tack,  and  in  order  to  add  new  hon- 
ors to  the  ass,  he  makes  it  to  be  a  miracle  ;  for  he  says, 
ver.  2,  it  was  a  colt  whereon  never  man  sat ;  signifying 
thereby,  that  as  the  ass  had  not  been  broken,  he  conse- 
quently was  inspired  into  good  manners^  for  we  do  not 
hear  that  he  kicked  Jesus  Christ  off.  There  is  not  a 
word  about  his  kicking  in  all  the  four  Evangelists. 

I  pass  on  from  these  feats  of  horsemanship  performed 
upon  a  jack-ass,  to  the  15th  chapter. 


AGE  OF   REASON.  22/ 

At  the  24th  verse  of  this  chapter,  Mark  speaks  oi part- 
ing ChrisC  s  garments  and  casting  lots  upon  them^  but  he 
applies  no  prophecy  to  it  as  Matthew  does.  He  rather 
speaks  of  it  as  a  thing  then  in  practice  with  executioners, 
as  it  is  at  this  day. 

At  the  28th  verse  of  the  same  chapter,  Mark  speaks  of 
Christ  being  crucified  between  two  thieves  ;  that,  says 
he,  the  Scriptures  might  be  fulfilled  which  saith^  And 
he  was  numbered  with  the  transgressors.  The  same 
thing  might  be  said  of  the  thieves. 

This  expression  is  in  Isaiah,  chap,  liii.,  ver.  12. 
Grotius  applies  it  to  Jeremiah.  But  the  case  has  hap- 
pened so  often  in  the  world,  where  innocent  men  have 
been  numbered  with  transgressors,  and  is  still  contin- 
ually happening,  that  it  is  absurdity  to  call  it  a  prophecy 
of  any  particular  person.  All  those  whom  the  church 
calls  martyrs  were  numbered  with  transgressors.  All 
the  honest  patriots  who  fell  upon  the  scaffold  in  France, 
in  the  time  of  Robespierre,  were  numbered  with  trans- 
gressors ;  and  if  himself  had  not  fallen,  the  same  case, 
according  to  a  note  in  his  own  hand-writing,  had  be- 
fallen me  ;  yet  I  suppose  the  bishop  will  not  allow  that 
Isaiah  was  prophecying  of  Thomas  Paine. 

These  are  all  the  passages  in  Mark  which  have  any 
reference  to  prophecies. 

Mark  concludes  his  book  by  making  Jesus  to  say  to 
his  disciples,  chap,  xvi.,  ver.  15,  "Go  ye  into  all  the 
world  and  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature.  He  that 
believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved  ;  but  he  that 
believe th  not  shall  be  damned  (fine  Popish  stuff  this). 
And  these  signs  shall  follow  them  that  believe  ;  In  my 
name  shall  they  cast  out  devils  ;  they  shall  speak  with 
new  tongues ;  they  shall  take  up  serpents ;  and  if  they 
drink  any  deadly  thing,  it  shall  not  hurt  them  ;  they 
shall  lay  hands  on  the  sick,  and  they  shall  recover." 

Now  the  bishop,  in  order  to  know  if  he  has  all  this 


228  AGE   OF   REASON. 

saving  and  wonder-working  faith,  should  try  those  things 
upon  himself.  He  should  take  a  good  dose  of  arsenic, 
and,  if  he  please,  I  will  send  him  a  rattlesnake  from 
America !  As  for  myself,  as  I  believe  in  God,  and  not 
at  all  in  Jesus  Christ,  nor  in  the  books  called  the  Scrip- 
tures, the  experiment  does  not  concern  me. 
I  pass  on  to  the  book  of  Luke. 


THE  BOOK  OF  LUKE. 

THERE  are  no  passages  in  Luke  called  prophecies, 
expecting  those  which  relate  to  the  passages  I  have 
already  examined. 

Luke  speaks  of  Mary  being  espoused  to  Joseph,  but  he 
makes  no  references  to  the  passages  in  Isaiah,  as  Matthew 
does.  He  speaks  also  of  Jesus  riding  into  Jerusalem  upon 
a  colt,  but  he  says  nothing  about  a  prophecy.  He  speaks 
of  John  the  Baptist,  and  refers  to  the  passage  in  Isaiah 
of  which  I  have  already  spoken. 

At  the  13th  chapter,  ver.  31,  he  says.  The  same  day 
there  came  certain  of  the  Pharisees^  saying  unto  him^ 
{Jesus^ )  Get  thee  out^  and  depart  hence^  for  Herod  wile 
kill  thee. — And  he  said  unto  them^  Go  ye,  and  tell  that 
fox.  Behold,  I  cast  out  devils,  and  I  do  cures  to-day  ana 
to-morrow  and  the  third  day  I  shall  be  perfected. 

Matthew  makes  Herod  to  die  whilst  Christ  was  a  child 
in  Egypt,  and  makes  Joseph  to  return  with  the  child  on 
the  news  of  Herod's  death,  who  had  sought  to  kill  him. 
Luke  makes  Herod  to  be  living  and  to  seek  the  life  of 
Jesus  after  Jesus  was  thirty  years  of  age ;  for  he  says, 
chap,  iii.,  ver.  23,  "And  Jesus  himself  began  to  be  about 
thirty  years  of  age,  being  as  was  supposed  the  son  of 
Joseph." 

The  obscurity  in  which  the  historical  part  of  the  Nevtf 


AGE   OF   REASON.  229 

Testament  is  involved  with  respect  to  Herod,  may  afford 
to  priests  and  commentators  a  plea,  which  to  some  may 
appear  plausible,  but  to  none  satisfactory,  that  the  Herod 
of  which  Matthew  speaks,  and  the  Herod  of  which  Luke 
speaks,  were  different  persons.  Matthew  calls  Herod  a 
king;  and  Luke,  chap,  iii.,  ver.  i  calls  Herod  tetrarch 
(that  is,  governor)  of  Galilee.  But  there  could  be  no 
such  person  as  a  K^ing  Herod^  because  the  Jews  and  their 
country  were  then  under  the  dominion  of  the  Roman 
emperors,  who  governed  them  by  tetrarchs  or  governors. 

Luke,  chap,  ii.,  makes  Jesus  to  be  born  when  Cyrenius 
was  governor  of  Syria,  to  which  government  Judea  was 
annexed  ;  and  according  to  this,  Jesus  was  not  born  in 
the  time  of  Herod.  Luke  says  nothing  about  Herod 
seeking  the  life  of  Jesus  when  he  was  born  ;  nor  of  his 
destroying  the  children  under  two  years  old :  nor  of 
Joseph  fleeing  with  Jesus  into  Eg>'pt ;  nor  of  his  returning 
from  thence.  On  the  contrary,  the  book  of  Luke  speaks 
as  if  the  person  it  calls  Christ  had  never  been  out  of 
Judea,  and  that  Herod  sought  his  life  after  he  commenced 
preaching,  as  is  before  stated.  I  have  already  shown 
that  Luke,  in  the  book  called  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles, 
(which  commentators  ascribe  to  Luke,)  contradicts  the 
account  in  Matthew,  with  respect  to  Judas  and  the  thirty 
pieces  of  silver.  Matthew  says,  that  Judas  returned  the 
money,  and  that  the  high-priests  bought  with  it  a  field 
to  bury  strangers  in.  Luke  says,  that  Judas  kept  the 
money,  and  bought  a  field  with  it  for  himself 

As  it  is  impossible  the  wisdom  of  God  should  err,  so  it 
is  impossible  those  books  could  have  been  written  by 
divine  inspiration.  Our  belief  in  God  and  his  unerring 
wisdom  forbids  us  to  believe  it.  As  for  myself,  I  feel 
religiously  happy  in  the  total  disbelief  of  it. 

There  are  no  other  passages  called  prophecies  in  Luke 
than  those  I  have  spoken  of.  I  pass  on  to  the  book  of 
John. 


230  AGE   OF   REASON. 


THE  BOOK  OF  JOHN. 

JOHN,  like  Mark  and  Luke,  is  not  much  of  a  proph- 
ecy-monger.    He  speaks  of  the  ass,  and  the  casting 
lots  for  Jesus'  clothes,    and  some   other   trifles,  of 
which  I  have  already  spoken. 

John  makes  Jesus  to  say,  chap.  v. ,  ver.  46,  ' '  For  had 
ye  believed  Moses,  ye  would  have  believed  me,  for  he 
wrote  of  me."  The  book  of  the  Acts,  in  speaking  of 
Jesus,  says,  chap,  iii.,  ver.  22,  "For  Moses  truly  said 
unto  the  fathers,  A  prophet  shall  the  Lord  your  God  raise 
up  unto  you,  of  your  brethren,  like  unto  me  ;  him  shall 
ye  hear  in  all  things  whatsoever  he  shall  say  unto  you." 

This  passage  is  in  Deuteronomy,  chap,  xviii.,  ver.  15. 
They  apply  it  as  a  prophecy  of  Jesus.  What  impositions ! 
The  person  spoken  of  in  Deuteronomy,  and  also  in 
Numbers  where  the  same  person  is  spoken  of,  is  Joshua^ 
the  minister  of  Moses,  and  his  immediate  successor,  and 
just  such  another  Robespierrean  character  as  Moses  is 
represented  to  have  been.  The  case,  as  related  in  those 
books,  is  as  follows  : — 

Moses  was  grown  old  and  near  to  his  end  ;  and  in  order 
to  prevent  confusion  after  his  death,  for  the  Israelites  had 
no  settled  system  of  government,  it  was  thought  best  to 
nominate  a  successor  to  Moses  while  he  was  yet  living. 
This  was  done,  as  we  are  told,  in  the  following  manner  : 

Numbers,  chap,  xxvii.,  ver.  12,  "And  the  Lord  said 
unto  Moses,  Get  thee  up  into  this  mount  Abarim,  and 
see  the  land  which  I  have  given  unto  the  children  of 
Israel. — And  when  thou  hast  seen  it,  thou  also  shalt  be 
gathered  unto  thy  people,  as  Aaron  thy  brother  was 
gathered."  Ver.  15,  "  And  Moses  spake  unto  the  Lord, 
saying.  Let  the  Lord,  the  God  of  the  spirits  of  all  flesh, 
set  a  man  over  the  congregation, — which  may  go  out 


AGK  OF   RKASON.  231 

before  them,  and  which  may  go  in  before  them,  and 
which  may  lead  them  out,  and  which  may  bring  them  in; 
that  the  congregation  of  the  Lord  be  not  as  sheep  which 
have  no  shepherd.  —  And  the  Lord  said  nnto  Moses, 
Take  thee  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun,  a  man  in  whom  is  the 
spirit,  and  lay  thine  hand  upon  him  ; — and  set  him 
before  Eleazar  the  priest,  and  before  all  the  congregation  ; 
and  give  him  a  charge  in  their  sight. — And  thou  shalt 
put  some  of  thine  honor  upon  him,  that  all  the  congrega- 
tion of  the  cliildren  of  Israel  may  be  obedient. ' '  Ver.  22, 
"And  Moses  did  as  the  Lord  commanded  him  ;  and  he 
took  Joshua,  and  set  him  before  Eleazar  the  priest,  and 
before  all  the  congregation  : — And  he  laid  his  hands  upon 
him,  and  gave  him  a  charge,  as  the  Lord  commanded  by 
the  hand  of  Moses." 

I  have  nothing  to  do,  in  this  place,  with  the  truth,  or 
the  conjuration  here  practised,  of  raising  up  a  successor 
to  Moses  like  unto  himself.  The  passage  sufficiently 
proves  it  is  Joshua,  and  that  it  is  an  imposition  in  John 
to  make  the  case  into  a  prophecy  of  Jesus.  But  the 
prophecy-mongers  were  so  inspired  with  falsehood,  that 
they  never  speak  truth.  * 

*  Newton,  Bishop  of  Bristol  in  England,  published  a  work  in  three  volumes,  entitled, 
"  Dissertations  on  the  Prophecies."  The  work  is  tediously  written  and  tiresome  to 
read.  He  strains  hard  to  make  every  passage  into  a  prophecy  that  suits  his  purpose. 
Among  others,  he  makes  this  expression  of  Moses.  "  The  Lord  shall  raise  thee  up  a 
prophet  like  unto  me,"  into  a  prophecy  of  Christ,  who  was  not  born,  according  to  the 
Bible  chronologies,  till  fifteen  hundred  and  fifty-iwo  years  after  the  time  of  Moses, 
whereas  it  was  an  immediate  successor  to  Moses,  who  was  then  neartiis  end,  that  is 
spoken  of  in  the  passage  above  quotetl. 

This  bishop,  the  better  to  impose  this  passage  on  the  world  as  a  prophecy  of  Christ, 
has  entirely  omitted  the  account  in  the  book  of  Numbers  which  I  have  given  at  length, 
word  for  word,  and  which  shows,  beyond  the  possibility  of  a  doubt,  that  the  person 
spoken  of  by  Moses  is  Joshua,  and  no  other  person. 

Newton  is  but  a  superficial  writer.  He  takes  up  things  upon  hearsay,  and  inserts 
them  without  either  examination  or  reflection,  and  the  more  extraordinary  and 
incredible  they  are  the  better  he  likes  them. 

In  speaking  of  the  walls  of  Babylon,  (volume  the  first,  page  363.)  he  makes  a  quota- 
tion from  a  traveller  of  the  name  of  Tavernier,  whom  he  calls  (by  way  of  giving  credit 
to  what  he  says)  a  celebrated travei/er .  that  those  walls  were  made  0/  burnt  brick,  teu 
feet  square  and  three  feet  thick. — If  Newton  had  only  thought  of  calculating  the  weight 
of  such  a  brick,  he  would  have  seen  the  impossibility  of  their  being  used  or  even  made. 
A  brick  ten  feet  square,  and  three  feet  thick,  contains  300  cubic  feet ;  and  allowing  a 


232  AGE   OF   REASON. 

I  pass  on  to  the  last  passage  in  these  fables  of  the 
Evang-elists  called  a  prophecy  of  Jesus  Christ. 

John  having  spoken  of  Jesus  expiring  on  the  cross 
between  two  thieves,  says,  chap.  xix. ,  ver.  32.  "Then 
came  the  soldiers  and  brake  the  legs  of  the  first  (meaning 
one  of  the  thieves)  and  of  the  other  which  was  crucified 
with  him.  But  when  they  came  to  Jesus  and  saw  that 
he  was  dead  already,  they  brake  not  his  legs — (ver.  36,) 
for  these  things  were  done  that  the  scriptures  should  be 
fulfilled,  A  bone  of  him  shall  not  be  broken.'''' 

The  passage  here  referred  to  is  m  Exodus,  and  has  no 
more  to  do  with  Jesus  than  with  the  ass  he  rode  upon  to 

cubic  foot  of  brick  to  be  only  one  hundred  pounds,  each  of  the  bishop's  bricks  would 
weigh  thirty  thousand  pounds  ;  and  it  would  take  about  thirty  cart  loads  of  clay  (one- 
horse  carts)  to  make  one  brick. 

But  his  account  of  the  stones  used  in  the  building  of  Solomon's  temple  (volume  ii. 
page  211,)  far  exceeds  his  bricks  often  feet  square  in  the  walls  of  Babylon  ;  these  are 
but  brick-bats  compared  to  them. 

The  stones,  (says  he,)  employed  in  the  foundation,  were  in  magnitude  forty  cubits, 
that  is,  above  sixty  feet,  a  cubit,  says  he,  being  somewhat  more  than  one  foot  and  a 
half,  (a  cubit  is  one  foot  nine  inches)  and  the  superstructure,  (says  this  bishop,) 
was  worthy  of  such  foundations.  There  were  some  stones,  says  he,  of  the  whitest 
marble  forty-five  cubits  long,  five  cubits  high,  and  six  cubits  broad.  These  are  the 
dimensions  this  bishop  has  given,  which  in  measure  of  twelve  inches  to  a  foot,  is  78 
feet  9  inches  long.  10  feet  6  inches  broad,  and  8  feet  3  inches  thick,  and  contains  7,234 
cubic  feet.     I  now  go  to  demonstrate  the  imposition  of  this  bishop. 

A  cubic  foot  of  water  weighs  sixty-two  pounds  and  a  half — the  specific  gravity  of 
of  marble  to  water  is  as  25^  is  to  one.  The  weight  therefore  of  a  cubic  foot  of  marble 
is  156  lbs,  which,  multiplied  by  7,234.  the  number  of  cubic  feet  in  one  of  those  stones, 
makes  the  weight  of  it  to  be  1. 128. 504  pounds,  which  is  503  tons.  Allowing  then  ahorse 
to  draw  about  half  a  ton,  it  will  require  a  thousand  horses  to  draw  one  such  stone  on 
the  ground  ;  how  then  were  they  to  be  lifted  into  the  building  by  hiiman  hands? 

The  bishop  may  talk  of  faith  removing  mountains,  but  all  the  faith  of  all  the  bishops 
that  ever  lived  could  not  remove  one  of  those  stones,  and  their  bodily  strength  given 
in. 

This  bishop  also  tells  oi  great  guns  used  by  the  Turks  at  the  taking  of  Constantinople, 
one  of  which  he  says  was  drawn  by  seventy  yoke  of  oxen,  and  by  two  thousand  men. 
Volume  iii.  page  117. 

The  weight  of  a  cannon  that  carries  a  ball  of  48  pounds,  which  is  the  largest  cannon 
that  are  cast,  weighs  8,000  pounds,  about  three  tons  and  a  half,  and  may  be  drawn  b\ 
three  yoke  of  oxen.  Any  body  may  now'  calculate  what  the  weight  of  the  bishop"? 
great  gun  must  be,  that  required  seventy  yoke  of  oxen  to  draw  it.  This  bishop  beats 
Gulliver. 

When  men  give  up  the  use  of  the  divine  gift  of  reason  in  writing  on  any  subject,  be 
it  religious  or  anything  else,  there  are  no  bounds  to  their  extravagance — no  limit  to 
their  absurdities. 

The  three  volumes  which  this  bishop  has  written  on  what  he  calls  the  prophecies, 
contain  about  1,200  pages,  and  he  says  in  vol.  iii.  page  117  "  I  have  studied  brevity." 
This  is  as  marvellous  as  the  bishop's  great  gun. 


( 


AGE   OF   REASON.  233 

Jerusalem  ;  nor  yet  so  much,  if  a  roasted  jackass,  like  a 
roasted  he-goat,  might  be  eaten  at  a  Jewish  Passover. 
It  might  be  some  consolation  to  an  ass  to  know,  that 
though  his  bones  might  be  picked,  they  would  not  be 
broken.     I  go  to  state  the  case. 

The  book  of  Exodus,  in  instituting  the  Jewish  passover, 
in  which  they  were  to  eat  a  he-lamb  or  a  he-goat,  says, 
chap,  xii.,  ver.  5,  ''Your  lamb  shall  be  without  blemish, 
a  male  of  the  first  year ;  ye  shall  take  it  from  the  sheep 
or  from  the  goats. 

The  book,  after  stating  some  ceremonies  to  be  used 
in  killing  and  dressing  it  (for  it  must  be  roasted,  not 
boiled)  says,  ver.  43,  ''And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses 
and  Aaron,  This  is  the  ordinance  of  the  passover  :  there 
shall  no  stranger  eat  thereof;  but  every  man's  servant 
that  is  bought  for  money,  when  thou  hast  circumcised 
him,  then  shall  he  eat  thereof.  A  foreigpier  and  an  hired 
servant  shall  not  eat  thereof  In  one  house  shall  it  be 
eaten  ;  thou  shalt  not  carry  forth  aught  of  the  flesh  abroad 
out  of  the  house,  neither  shall  ye  break  a  bone  thereof.  " 

We  here  see  that  the  case  as  it  stands  in  Exodus  is  a 
ceremony  and  not  a  prophecy,  and  totally  unconnected 
with  Jesus'  bones,  or  any  part  of  him. 

John  having  thus  filled  up  the  measure  of  apostolic 
fable,  concludes  his  book  with  something  that  beats  all 
fable  ;  for  he  says  at  the  last  verse,  ' '  And  there  are  also 
many  other  things  which  Jesus  did,  the  which  if  they 
should  be  written  every  one,  /  suppose  that  even  the 
world  itself  could  not  contain  the  books  that  should  be 
written. ' ' 

This  is  what  in  vulgar  life  is  called  a  thumper\  that  is, 
not  only  a  lie,  but  a  lie  beyond  the  line  of  possibility ; 
besides  which,  it  is  an  absurdity,  for  if  they  should  be 
written  in  the  world,  the  world  would  contain  them. 

Here  ends  the  examination  of  the  passages  called 
prophecies. 


234  AGE   OF   REASON. 

I  have  now,  reader,  gone  through  and  examined  all 
the  passages  which  the  four  books  of  Matthew,  Mark, 
Luke,  and  John,  quote  from  the  Old  Testament^  and  call 
them  prophecies  of  Jesus  Christ.  When  I  first  sat  down 
to  this  examination,  I  expected  to  find  cause  for  some 
censure,  but  little  did  I  expect  to, find  them  so  utterly 
destitute  of  truth,  and  of  all  pretensions  to  it,  as  I  have 
shown  them  to  be. 

The  practice  which  the  writers  of  those  books  employ 
is  not  more  false  than  it  is  absurd.  They  state  some 
trifling  case  of  the  person  they  call  Jesus  Christ,  and  then 
cut  out  a  sentence,  from  some  passage  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  call  it  a  prophecy  of  that  case.  But  when  the 
words  thus  cut  out  are  restored  to  the  place  they  are 
taken  from,  and  read  with  the  words  before  and  after 
them,  they  give  the  lie  to  the  New  Testament.  A  short 
instance  or  two  of  this  will  sufl&ce  for  the  whole. 

They  make  Joseph  to  dream  of  an  angel,  who  informs 
him  that  Herod  is  dead,  and  tells  him  to  come  with  the 
child  out  of  Eg}'pt.  They  then  cut  out  a  sentence  from 
the  book  of  Hosea,  Out  of  Egypt  have  I  called  my  Son^ 
and  apply  it  as  a  prophecy  in  that  case. 

The  words.  And  called  my  Son  out  of  Egypt^  are  in  the 
Bible :  but  what  of  that?  They  are  only  part  of  a 
passage,  and  not  a  whole  passage,  and  stand  immediately 
connected  with  other  words,  which  show  they  refer  to 
the  children  of  Israel  coming  out  of  Egypt  in  the  time  of 
Pharaoh,  and  to  the  idolatr}'  they  committed  afterwards. 

Again,  they  tell  us  that  when  the  soldiers  came  to 
break  the  legs  of  the  crucified  persons,  they  found  Jesus 
was  already  dead,  and  therefore  did  not  break  his.  They 
then,  with  some  alteration  of  the  original,  cut  out  a 
sentence  from  Exodus,  A  bone  of  him,  shall  not  be  broken^ 
and  apply  it  as  a  prophecy  of  that  case. 

The  words,  Neither  shall  ye  break  a  bone  thereof  (for 
they  have  altered  the  text)  are  in  the  Bible — but  what  of 


AGE   OF   REASON.  235 

that?  They  are,  as  in  the  former  case,  only  part  of  a 
passage,  and  not  a  whole  passage ;  and,  when  read  with 
the  words  they  are  immediately  joined  to,  show  it  is  the 
bones  of  a  he-lamb  or  a  he-goat  of  which  the  passage 
speaks. 

These  repeated  forgeries  and  falsifications  create  a  well- 
founded  suspicion,  that  all  the  cases  spoken  of  concerning 
the  person  called  Jesus  Christ  are  made  cases^  on  purpose 
to  lug  in,  and  that  very  clumsily,  some  broken  sentences 
from  the  Old  Testament^  and  apply  them  as  prophecies 
of  those  cases  ;  and  that  so  far  from  his  being  the  Son  of 
God,  he  did  not  exist  even  as  a  man — that  he  is  merely 
an  imaginary  or  allegorical  character,  as  Apollo, 
Hercules,  Jupiter,  and  all  the  deities  of  antiquity  were. 
There  is  no  history  written  at  the  time  Jesus  Christ  is 
said  to  have  lived  that  speaks  of  the  existence  of  such  a 
person,  even  as  a  man. 

Did  we  find  in  any  other  book  pretending  to  give  a 
system  of  religion,  the  falsehoods,  falsifications,  contra- 
dictions, and  absurdities,  which  are  to  be  met  with  in 
almost  every  page  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament^  all 
the  priests  of  the  present  day  who  supposed  themselves 
capable,  would  triumphantly  show  their  skill  in  criticism, 
and  cry  it  down  as  a  most  glaring  imposition.  But  since 
the  books  in  question  belong  to  their  own  trade  and 
profession,  they,  or  at  least  many  of  them,  seek  to  stifle 
every  inquiry  into  them,  and  abuse  those  who  have  the 
honesty  and  the  courage  to  do  it. 

When  a  book,  as  is  the  case  with  the  Old  and  New 
Testament^  is  ushered  into  the  world  under  the  title  of 
being  the  Word  of  Gody  it  ought  to  be  examined  with  the 
utmost  strictness,  in  order  to  know  if  it  has  a  well-founded 
claim  to  that  title  or  not,  and  whether  we  are,  or  are  not, 
imposed  upon  ;  for  as  no  poison  is  so  dangerous  as  that 
which  poisons  the  physic,  so  no  falsehood  is  so  fatal  as 
that  which  is  made  an  article  of  faith. 


236  AGE   OF   REASON. 

This  examination  becomes  more  necessary,  because 
when  the  New  Testament  was  written,  I  might  say 
invented,  the  art  of  printing  was  not  known,  and  there 
were  no  other  copies  of  the  Old  Testament  than  written 
copies.  A  written  copy  of  that  book  would  cost  about  as 
much  as  600  common  printed  Bibles  now  cost.  Conse- 
quently the  book  was  in  the  hands  of  but  very  few 
persons,  and  these  chiefly  of  the  church.  This  gave  an 
opportunity  to  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  to  make 
quotations  from  the  Old  Testament  as  they  pleased,  and 
call  them  prophecies,  with  very  little  danger  of  being 
detected.  Besides  which,  the  terrors  and  inquisitorial 
fury  of  the  church,  like  what  they  tell  us  of  the  flaming 
sword  that  turned  every  way,  stood  sentry  over  the  New 
Testament ;  and  time,  which  brings  every  thing  else  to 
light,  has  served  to  thicken  the  darkness  that  guards  it 
from  detection. 

Were  the  New  Testament  now  to  appear  for  the  first 
time,  every  priest  of  the  present  day  would  examine  it 
line  by  line,  and  compare  the  detached  sentences  it  calls 
prophecies  with  the  whole  passages  in  the  Old  Testament 
from  whence  they  are  taken.  Why  then  do  they  not 
make  the  same  examination  at  this  time,  as  they  would 
make  had  the  New  Testament  n^v&L  appeared  before?  If 
it  be  proper  and  right  to  make  it  in  one  case,  it  is  equally 
proper  and  right  to  do  it  in  the  other  case.  Length  of 
time  can  make  no  difference  in  the  right  to  do  it  at  any 
time.  But  instead  of  doing  this,  they  go  on  as  their 
predecessors  went  on  before  them,  to  tell  the  people  there 
are  prophecies  of  Jesus  Christ,  when  the  truth  is,  there 
are  none. 

They  tell  us  that  Jesus  rose  from  the  dead,  and  ascended 
into  heaven.  It  is  very  easy  to  say  so  ;  a  great  lie  is  as 
easily  told  as  a  little  one.  But  if  he  had  done  so,  those 
would  have  been  the  only  circumstances  respecting  him 
that  would  have  differed  from  the  common  lot  of  man  ; 


AGE  OF   REASON.  UT^J 

and  consequently  the  only  case  that  would  apply  exclu- 
sively to  him,  as  a  prophecy,  would  be  some  passage  in 
the  Old  Testament  that  foretold  such  things  of  him. 
But  there  is  not  a  passage  in  the  Old  Testament  that 
speaks  of  a  person  who,  after  being  crucified,  dead,  and 
buried,  should  rise  from  the  dead  and  ascend  into  heaven. 

Our  prophecy-mongers  supply  the  silence  the  Old 
Testament  guards  upon  such  things,  by  telling  us  of 
passages  they  call  prophecies,  and  that  falsely  so,  about 
Joseph's  dream,  old  clothes,  broken  bones,  and  such-like 
trifling  stuff. 

In  writing  upon  this,  as  upon  every  other  subject,  I 
speak  a  language  full  and  intelligible.  I  deal  not  in 
hints  and  intimations.     I  have  several  reasons  for  this. 

Firsts  that  I  may  be  clearly  understood. 

Secondly^  that  it  may  be  seen  I  am  in  earnest,  and 

Thirdly^  because  it  is  an  affront  to  truth  to  treat  false- 
hood with  complaisance. 

I  will  close  this  treatise  with  a  subject  I  have  already 
touched  upon  in  the  First  Part  of  the  Age  of  Reason. 

The  world  has  been  amused  with  the  term  revealed 
religion^  and  the  generality  of  priests  apply  this  term  to 
the  books  called  the  Old  and  New  Testament.  The 
Mahometans  apply  the  same  term  to  the  Koran.  There 
is  no  man  that  believes  in  revealed  religion  stronger 
than  I  do  ;  but  it  is  not  the  reveries  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament^  nor  of  the  Koran,  that  I  dignify  with  that 
sacred  title.  That  which  is  revelation  to  me  exists  in 
something  which  no  human  mind  can  invent,  no  human 
hand  can  counterfeit  or  alter. 

The  word  of  God  is  the  Creation  we  behold  ;  and  this 
word  of  God  revealeth  to  man  all  that  is  necessary  for 
man  to  know  of  his  Creator. 

Do  we  want  to  contemplate  his  power?  We  see  it  in 
the  immensity  of  his  creation. 

Do  we  want  to  contemplate  his  wisdom?  We  see  it  in 


238  AGE    OF    REASON. 

the  unchangeable  order  by  which  the  incomprehensible 
whole  is  governed. 

Do  we  want  to  contemplate  his  munificence  ?  We  see 
it  in  the  abundance  with  which  he  fills  the  earth. 

Do  we  want  to  contemplate  his  mercy?  We  see  it  in 
his  not  withholding  that  abundance  even  from  the  un- 
thankful. 

Do  we  want  to  contemplate  his  will,  so  far  as  it  respects 
man  ?  The  goodness  he  shows  to  all  is  a  lesson  for  our 
conduct  to  each  other. 

In  fine,  Do  we  want  to  know  what  God  is?  Search  not 
the  book  called  the  Scripture,  which  any  human  hand 
might  make,  or  any  impostor  invent ;  but  the  Scripture 
called  the  Creation. 

When,  in  the  First  Part  of  the  Age  of  Reason^  I  called 
the  Creation  the  true  revelation  of  God  to  man,  I  did  not 
know  that  any  other  person  had  expressed  the  same  idea. 
But  I  lately  met  with  the  writings  of  Doctor  Conyers 
Middleton,  published  the  beginning  of  last  century,  in 
which  he  expresses  himself  in  the  same  manner,  with 
respect  to  the  Creation,  as  I  have  done  in  the  Age  of 
Reason, 

He  was  principal  librarian  of  the  University  of  Cam- 
bridge in  England,  which  furnished  him  with  extensive 
opportunities  of  readingand  necessarily  required  he  should 
be  well  acquainted  with  the  dead  as  well  as  the  living 
languages.  He  was  a  man  of  strong  original  mind  ;  had 
the  courage  to  think  for  himself,  and  the  honesty  to  speak 
his  thoughts. 

He  made  a  journey  to  Rome,  from  whence  he  wrote 
letters  to  show  that  the  forms  and  ceremonies  of  the 
Romish  Christian  church  were  taken  from  the  degenerate 
state  of  the  heathen  mythology,  as  it  stood  in  the  latter 
times  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans.  He  attacked  without 
ceremony  the  miracles  which  the  church  pretended  to 
perform  ;  and  in  one  of  his  treatises  he  calls  the  Creation 


AGE   OF   RKASON.  239 

a  revelation.  The  priests  of  England  of  that  day,  in 
order  to  defend  their  citadel  by  first  defending  its  out- 
works, attacked  him  for  attacking  the  Romish  cere- 
monies ;  and  one  of  them  censures  him  for  calling  the 
Creation  a  revelation.     He  thus  replies  to  him. 

"One  of  them,"  says  he,  "appears  to  be  scandalized 
by  the  title  of  revelation^  which  I  have  given  to  that 
discovery'  which  God  made  of  himself  in  the  visible  works 
of  his  Creation.  Yet  it  is  no  other  than  what  the  wise 
in  all  ages  have  given  to  it,  who  consider  it  as  the  most 
authentic  and  indisputable  revelation  which  God  has 
ever  given  of  himself,  from  the  beginning  of  the  world 
to  this  day.  It  was  this  by  which  the  first  notice  of  him 
was  revealed  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth,  and  by 
which  alone  it  has  been  kept  up  ever  since  among  the 
several  nations  of  it.  From  this  the  reason  of  man  was 
enabled  to  trace  out  his  nature  and  attributes,  and,  by  a 
gradual  deduction  of  consequences,  to  learn  his  own 
nature  also,  with  all  the  duties  belonging  to  it  which 
relate  either  to  God  or  to  his  fellow-creatures.  This  con- 
stitution of  things  was  ordained  by  God  as  an  universal 
law  or  rule  of  conduct  to  man  —  the  source  of  all  his 
knowledge — the  test  of  all  truth,  by  which  all  subsequent 
revelations  which  are  supposed  to  have  been  given  by 
God  in  any  other  manner  must  be  tried,  and  cannot  be 
received  as  divine  any  further  than  as  they  are  found  to 
tally  and  coincide  with  this  original  standard. 

"It  was  this  divine  law  which  I  referred  to  in  the 
passage  above  recited,  (meaning  the  passage  on  which 
they  had  attacked  him,)  being  desirous  to  excite  the 
reader's  attention  to  it,  as  it  would  enable,  him  to  judge 
more  freely  of  the  argument  I  was  handling.  For  by 
contemplating  this  law,  he  would  discover  the  genuine 
way  which  God  himself  has  marked  out  to  us  for  the 
acquisition  of  true  knowledge  :  not  from  the  authority  or 
reports  of  our  fellow-creatures,  but  from  the  information 


240  AGE   OF   REASON. 

of  the  facts  and  material  objects  which,  in  his  provi- 
dential distribution  of  worldly  things,  he  hath  presented 
to  the  perpetual  observation  of  our  senses.  For  as  it 
was  from  these  that  his  existence  and  nature,  the  most 
important  articles  of  all  knowledge,  were  first  discovered 
to  man,  so  that  grand  discovery  furnished  new  light 
towards  tracing  out  the  rest,  and  made  all  the  inferior 
subjects  of  human  knowledge  more  easily  discoverable 
to  us  by  the  same  method. 

"I  had  another  view  likewise  in  the  same  passages, 
and  applicable  to  the  same  end,  of  giving  the  reader  a 
more  enlarged  notion  on  the  question  in  dispute,  who, 
by  turning  his  thoughts,  to  reflect  on  the  works  of  the 
Creator,  as  they  are  manifested  to  us  in  this  fabric  of  the 
world,  could  not  fail  to  observe,  that  they  are  all  of  them 
great,  noble,  and  suitable  to  the  majesty  of  his  nature, 
carrying  with  them  the  proofs  of  their  origin,  and  show- 
ing themselves  to  be  the  production  of  an  all-wise  and 
almighty  Being ;  and  by  accustoming  his  mind  to  these 
sublime  reflections,  he  will  be  prepared  to  determine 
whether  those  miraculous  interpositions  so  confidently 
affirmed  to  us  by  the  primitive  Fathers,  can  reasonably 
be  thought  to  make  a  part  in  the  grand  scheme  of  the 
divine  administration,  or  whether  it  be  agreeable  that 
God,  who  created  all  things  by  his  will,  and  can  give 
what  turn  to  them  he  pleases  by  the  same  will,  should, 
for  the  particular  purposes  of  his  government  and  the 
services  of  the  Church,  descend  to  the  expedient  of  visions 
and  revelations  granted  sometimes  to  boys  for  the 
instruction  of  the  elders,  and  sometimes  to  women  to 
settle  the  fashion  and  length  of  their  veils,  and  some- 
times to  pastors  of  the  Church  to  enjoin  them  to  ordain 
one  man  a  lecturer,  another  a  priest ; — or  that  he  should 
scatter  a  profusion  of  miracles  around  the  stake  of  a 
martyr,  yet  all  of  them  vain  and  insignificant,  and  with- 
out any  sensible  effect,  either  of  preserving  the  life  or 


AGE  OF   REASON.  24 1 

easing  the  sufferings  of  the  saint ;  or  even  of  mortifying 
his  persecutors,  who  were  always  left  to  enjoy  the  full 
triumph  of  their  cruelty,  and  the  poor  martyr  to  expire 
in  a  miserable  death.  When  these  things,  I  say,  are 
brought  to  the  original  test,  and  compared  with  the 
genuine  and  indisputable  works  of  the  Creator,  how 
minute,  how  trifling,  how  contemptible  must  they  be ! 
and  how  incredible  must  it  be  thought,  that  for  the 
instruction  of  his  church  God  should  employ  ministers 
so  precarious,  unsatisfactory,  and  inadequate,  as  the 
ecstacies  of  women  and  boys,  and  the  visions  of  inter- 
ested priests,  which  were  derided  at  the  very  time  by 
men  of  sense  to  whom  they  were  proposed ! 

"That  this  universal  law  (continues  Middleton, 
meaning  the  law  revealed  in  the  works  of  the  Creation) 
was  actually  revealed  to  the  heathen  world  long  before 
the  gospel  was  known,  we  learn  from  all  the  principal 
sages  of  antiquity,  who  made  it  the  capital  subject  of 
their  studies  and  writings. 

"Cicero  (says  Middleton)  has  given  us  a  short  abstract 
of  it  in  a  fragment  still  remaining  from  one  of  his  books 
on  government,  which  (says  Middleton)  I  shall  here 
transcribe  in  his  own  words,  as  they  will  illustrate  my 
sense  also  in  the  passages  that  appear  so  dark  and  dan- 
gerous to  my  antagonist. 

"'The  true  law  (it  is  Cicero  who  speaks)  is  right 
reason  conformable  to  the  nature  of  things,  constant, 
eternal,  diffused  through  all,  which  calls  us  to  duty  by 
commanding,  deters  us  from  sin  by  forbidding ;  which 
never  loses  its  influence  with  the  good,  nor  ever  pre- 
serves it  with  the  wicked.  This  law  cannot  be  overruled 
by  any  other,  nor  abrogated  in  whole  or  in  part ;  nor  can 
we  be  absolved  from  it  either  by  the  senate  or  by  the 
people ;  nor  are  we  to  seek  any  other  comment  or  inter- 
preter of  it  but  itself;  nor  can  there  be  one  law  at  Rome, 
and  another  at  Athens  —  one  now  and  another  hereafter ; 


2}2  AGE  OF   REASON. 

but  the  same  eternal,  immutable  law  comprehends  all 
nations,  at  all  times,  under  one  common  master  and 
governor  of  all — God.  He  is  the  inventor,  propounder,, 
enactor  of  this  law  ;  and  whoever  will  not  obey  it  must  first 
renouncehimself  and  throw  off  the  nature  of  man;  by  doing 
which,  he  will  suffer  the  greatest  punishments,  though  he 
should  escape  all  the  other  torments  which  are  commonly 
believed  to  be  prepared  for  the  wicked.'"  Here  ends 
the  quotation  from  Cicero. 

"Our  doctors  (continues  Middleton)  perhaps  will  look 
on  this  as  rank  deism  ;  but,  let  them  call  it  what  they 
will,  I  shall  ever  avow  and  defend  it  as  the  fundamental, 
essential,  and  vital  part  of  all  true  religion. "  Here  ends 
the  quotation  from  Middleton. 

I  have  here  g^ven  the  reader  two  sublime  extracts  from 
men  who  lived  in  ages  of  time  far  remote  from  each 
other,  but  who  thought  alike.  Cicero  lived  before  the 
time  in  which  they  tell  us  Christ  was  born.  Middleton 
may  be  called  a  man  of  our  own  time,  as  he  lived  within 
the  same  century  with  ourselves. 

In  Cicero  we  see  that  vast  superiority  of  mind,  that 
sublimity  of  right  reasoning  and  justness  of  ideas  which 
man  acquires,  not  by  studying  Bibles  and  Testaments^ 
and  the  theology  of  schools  built  thereon,  but  by  study- 
ing the  Creator  in  the  immensity  and  unchangeable  order 
of  his  Creation,  and  the  immutability  of  his  law.  There 
cannot^  says  Cicero,  be  one  law  now,  and  another  here- 
after; but  the  same  eternal^  immutable  law  com,prehends 
all  nations  at  all  times^  under  one  common  master  and 
governor  of  all — God.  But  according  to  the  doctrine 
of  schools  which  priests  have  set  up,  we  see  one  law, 
called  the  Old  Testament^  given  in  one  age  of  the  world, 
and  another  law,  called  the  New  Testament^  given  in  an- 
other age  of  the  world.  As  all  this  is  contradictor)*  to 
the  eternal,  immutable  nature,  and  the  unerring  and 
unchangeable  wisdom  of  God,  we  must  be  compelled  to 


AGE  OF   RKASON.  243 

hold  this  doctrine  to  be  false,  and  the  old  and  the  new 
law,  called  the  O/d  and  the  New  Testament^  to  be  im- 
positions, fables,  and  forgeries. 

In  Middleton  we  see  the  manly  eloquence  of  an 
enlarged  mind,  and  the  genuine  sentiments  of  a  true 
believer  in  his  Creator.  Instead  of  reposing  his  faith  on 
books,  by  whatever  name  they  may  be  called,  whether 
Old  Testament  or  Neu\  he  fixes  the  Creation  as  the  great 
original  standard  by  which  every  other  thing  called  the 
word  or  work  of  God  is  to  be  tried.  In  this  we  have  an  in- 
disputable scale  whereby  to  measure  every  word  or  work 
imputed  to  him.  If  the  thing  so  imputed  carries  not  in 
itself  the  evidence  of  the  same  almightiness  of  power,  of 
the  same  unerring  truth  and  wisdom,  and  the  same  un- 
changeable order  in  all  its  parts,  as  are  visibly  demon- 
strated to  our  senses,  and  comprehensible  by  our  reason, 
in  the  magnificent  fabric  of  the  universe,  that  word  or 
that  work  is  not  of  God.  Let  then  the  two  books  called 
the  Old  diMd  New  Testament  be  tried  by  this  rule,  and 
the  result  will  be,  that  the  authors  of  them,  whoever 
they  were,  will  be  convicted  of  forgery. 

The  invariable  principles  and  unchangeable  order 
which  regulate  the  movements  of  all  the  parts  that  com- 
pose the  universe,  demonstrate  both  to  our  senses  and 
our  reason  that  its  creator  is  a  God  of  unerring  truth. 
But  the  Old  Testament^  beside  the  numberless  absurd 
and  bagatelle  stories  it  tells  of  God,  represents  him  as  a 
God  of  deceit,  a  God  not  to  be  confided  in.  Ezekiel 
makes  God  to  say,  chap,  xiv.,  ver.  9,  "And  if  the  prophet 
be  deceived  when  he  hath  spoken  a  thing,  /  the  Lord 
have  deceived  that  prophets  And  at  the  20th  chap., 
verse  25,  he  makes  God,  in  speaking  of  the  children 
of  Israel,  to  say.  Wherefore  I  gave  them  statutes  that 
were  not  good^  and  judgments  whereby  they  should  not  • 
live. 

This,  so  far  from  being  the  word  of  God,  is  horrid  bias- 


244  AGE   OF  REASON. 

phemy  against  him.     Reader,  put  thy  confidence  in  thy 
God,  and  put  no  trust  in  the  Bible. 

The  same  Old  Testament^  after  telling  us  that  God 
created  the  heavens  and  the  earth  in  six  days,  makes  the 
same  almighty  power  and  eternal  wisdom  employ  itself 
in  giving  directions  how  a  priest's  garments  should  be 
cut,  and  what  sort  of  stuff  they  should  be  made  of,  and 
what  their  offerings  should  be — gold,  and  silver,  and 
brass,  and  blue,  and  purple,  and  scarlet,  and  fine  linen, 
and  goats'  hair,  and  rams'  skins  dyed  red,  and  badgers' 
skins,  &c.,  chap,  xxv.,  ver.  3;  and  in  one  of  the  pretend- 
ed prophecies  I  have  just  examined,  God  is  made  to  give 
directions  how  they  should  kill,  cook,  and  eat  a  he-lamb 
or  a  he-goat.  And  Ezekiel,  chap,  iv.,  to  fill  up  the 
measure  of  abominable  absurdity,  makes  God  to  order 
him  to  take  wheat^  and  barley^  and  beans^  and  lentiles., 
and  millet^  and  Jitches^  and  make  thee  bread  thereof^  and 
bake  it  with  human  dung^  and  eat  it;  but  as  Ezekiel 
complained  that  this  mess  was  too  strong  for  his  stomach, 
the  matter  was  compromised  from  man's  dung  to  cow 
dung,   Ezekiel,    chap.    iv. 

Compare  all  this  ribaldry,  blasphemously  called 
the  word  of  God,  with  the  almighty  Power  that 
created  the  universe,  and  whose  eternal  wisdom  directs 
and  governs  all  its  mighty  movements,  and  we 
shall  be  at  a  loss  to  find  a  name  sufficiently  contempti- 
ble for  it. 

In  the  promises  which  the  Old  Testament  pretends 
that  God  made  to  his  people,  the  same  derogatory  ideas 
of  him  prevail.  It  makes  God  to  promise  to  Abraham, 
that  his  seed  should  be  like  the  stars  in  heaven  and  the 
sand  on  the  sea-shore  for  multitude,  and  that  he  would 
give  them  the  land  of  Canaan  as  their  inheritance  for 
'ever.  But  observe,  reader,  how  the  performance  of  this 
promise  was  to  begin,  and  then  ask  thine  own  reason,  if 
the  wisdom  of  God,  whose  power  is  equal  to  his  will, 


AfJK  OF  REASON.  245 

could,  consistently  with  that  power  and  that  wisdom, 
make  such  a  promise. 

The  performance  of  the  promise  was  to  begin,  accord- 
ing to  that  book,  by  400  years  ofboudage  and  affliction. 
Genesis,  chap,  xv,,  ver.  13.  And  God  said  unto  Abraham, 
Know  of  a  surety,  that  thy  seed  shall  be  a  stranger  in  a 
land  that  is  not  theirs,  and  shall  serve  them,  and  they 
shall  afflict  them  400  years.  This  promise  then  to 
Abraham  and  his  seed  for  ever,  to  inherit  the  land  of 
Canaan,  had  it  been  a  fact  instead  of  a  fable,  was  to 
operate  in  the  commencement  of  it,  as  a  curse  upon  all 
the  people  and  their  children,  and  their  children's 
children,  for  400  years. 

But  the  case  is,  the  book  of  Genesis  was  written  after 
the  bondage  in  Egypt  had  taken  place  ;  and  in  order  to 
get  rid  of  the  disgrace  of  the  Lord's  chosen  people,  as 
they  called  themselves,  being  in  bondage  to  the  Gentiles, 
they  make  God  to  be  the  author  of  it,  and  annex  it  as  a 
condition  to  a  pretended  promise  ;  as  if  God,  in  making 
that  promise,  had  exceeded  his  power  in  performing  it, 
and  consequently  his  wisdom  in  making  it,  and  was 
obliged  to  compromise  with  them  for  one-half,  and  with 
the  Egyptians,  to  whom  they  were  to  be  in  bondage,  for 
the  other  half. 

Without  degrading  my  own  reason  by  bringing  those 
wretched  and  contemptible  tales  into  a  comparative  view 
with  the  almighty  power  and  eternal  wisdom  which  the 
Creator  hath  demonstrated  to  our  senses  in  the  creation 
of  the  universe,  I  will  confine  myself  to  say,  that  if  we 
compare  them  with  the  divine  and  forcible  sentiments  of 
Cicero,  the  result  will  be  that  the  human  mind  has  de- 
generated by  believing  them.  Man,  in  a  state  of 
grovelling  superstition,  from  which  he  has  not  courage 
to  rise,  loses  the  energy  of  his  mental  powers. 

I  will  not  tire  the  reader  with  more  observations  on  the 
Old  Testament. 


246  AGE  OF   REASON, 

As  to  the  New  Testament^  if  it  be  brought  and  tried 
by  that  standard,  which,  as  Middleton  wisely  says,  God 
has  revealed  to  our  senses  of  his  almighty  power  and 
wisdom  in  the  creation  and  government  of  the  visible 
universe,  it  will  be  found  equally  as  false,  paltry,  and 
absurd  as  the  Old. 

Without  entering,  in  this  place,  into  any  other  argu- 
ment, that  the  story  of  Christ  is  of  human  invention  and 
not  of  divine  origin,  I  will  confine  myself  to  show  that 
it  is  derogatory  to  God,  by  the  contrivance  of  it ;  because 
the  means  it  supposes  God  to  use  are  not  adequate  to  the 
end  to  be  obtained ;  and  therefore  are  derogatory  to  the 
almightiness  of  his  power  and  the  eternity  of  his  wisdom. 

The  New  Testament  supposes  that  God  sent  his  Son 
upon  earth,  to  make  a  new  covenant  with  man,  which 
the  church  calls  the  covenant  of  grace.,  and  to  instruct 
mankind  in  a  new  doctrine,  which  it  calls  faith.^  mean- 
ing thereby,  not  faith  in  God,  for  Cicero  and  all  true 
Deists  always  had  and  always  will  have  this — but  faith 
in  the  person  called  Jesus  Christ,  and  that  whoever  had 
not  this  faith  should,  to  use  the  words  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment., be  DAMNED. 

Now,  if  this  were  a  fact,  it  is  consistent  with  that 
attribute  of  God  called  \i\^  goodness.,  that  no  time  should 
be  lost  in  letting  poor  unfortunate  man  know  it ;  and  as 
that  goodness  was  united  to  almighty  power,  and  that 
power  to  almighty  wisdom,  all  the  means  existed  in  the 
hand  of  the  Creator  to  make  it  known  immediately  over 
the  whole  earth,  in  a  manner  suitable  to  the  almighti- 
ness of  his  divine  nature,  and  with  evidence  that  would 
not  leave  man  in  doubt ;  for  it  is  always  incumbent  upon 
us,  in  all  cases,  to  believe  that  the  Almighty  always  acts» 
not  by  imperfect  means,  as  imperfect  man  acts,  but  con- 
sistently with  his  almightiness.  It  is  this  only  that  can 
become  the  infallible  criterion  by  which  we  can  possibly 
distinguish  the  works  of  God  from  the  works  of  man. 


AGE   OF   REASON.  ^4/ 

Observe  now,  reader,  how  the  comparison  between 
this  supposed  mission  of  Christ,  on  the  belief  or  disbelief 
of  which  they  say  man  was  to  be  saved  or  damned  — 
observe,  I  say,  how  the  comparison  between  this  and  the 
almighty  power  and  wisdom  of  God,  demonstrated  to  our 
senses  in  the  visible  creation,  goes  on. 

The  Old  Testament  tells  us  that  God  created  the 
heavens  and  the  earth,  and  everything  therein,  in  six  days. 
The  term  six  days  is  ridiculous  enough  when  applied  to 
God ;  but  leaving  out  that  absurdity,  it  contains  the  idea 
of  almighty  power  acting  unitedly  with  almighty  wisdom 
to  produce  an  immense  work,  that  of  the  creation  of  the 
universe  and  every  thing  therein,  in  a  short  time. 

Now  as  the  eternal  salvation  of  man  is  of  much  greater 
importance  than  his  creation,  and  as  that  salvation 
depends,  as  the  New  Testament  teWs  us,  on  man's  know- 
ledge of  and  belief  in  the  person  called  Jesus  Christ,  it 
necessarily  follows  from  our  belief  in  the  goodness  and 
justice  of  God,  and  our  knowledge  of  his  almighty  power 
and  wisdom,  as  demonstrated  in  the  creation,  that  all 
THIS,  if  true,  would  be  made  known  to  all  parts  of  the 
world,  in  as  little  time,  at  least,  as  was  employed  in 
making  a  world.  To  suppose  the  Almighty  would  pay 
greater  regard  and  attention  to  the  creation  and  organi- 
zation of  inanimate  matter,  than  he  would  to  the  salva- 
tion of  innumerable  millions  of  souls,  which  himself  had 
created  "aj  t/te  image  of  himsel/^^''  is  to  offer  an  insult  to 
his  goodness  and  his  justice. 

Now,  observe,  reader,  how  the  promulgation  of  this 
pretended  salvation  by  a  knowledge  of  and  a  belief  in 
Jesus  Christ  went  on,  compared  with  the  work  of 
creation. 

In  the  first  place,  it  took  longer  time  to  make  a  child 
than  to  make  the  world,  for  nine  months  were  passed 
away  and  totally  lost  in  a  state  of  pregnancy  ;  which  is 
more  than  forty  times  longer  time  than  God  employed 


248  AGE   OF   REASON. 

in  making  the  world,  according  to  the  Bible  account. 
Secondly,  several  years  of  Christ's  life  were  lost  in  a 
state  of  human  infancy  :  but  the  universe  was  in  maturity 
the  moment  it  existed.  Thirdly,  Christ,  as  Luke  asserts, 
was  thirty  years  old  before  he  began  to  preach  what  they 
call  his  mission  :  millions  of  souls  died  in  the  mean  time 
without  knowing  it.  Fourthly,  it  was  above  300  years 
from  that  time  before  the  book  called  the  New  Testament 
was  compiled  into  a  written  copy,  before  which  time 
there  was  no  such  book.  Fifthly,  it  was  above  a  thou- 
sand years  after  that,  before  it  could  be  circulated, 
because  neither  Jesus  nor  his  apostles  had  knowledge  of, 
or  were  inspired  with  the  art  of  printing ;  and  conse- 
quently, as  the  means  for  making  it  universally  known 
did  not  exist,  the  means  were  not  equal  to  the  end,  and 
therefore  it  is  not  the  work  of  God. 

I  will  here  subjoin  the  19th  Psalm,  which  is  truly 
Deistical,  to  show  how  universally  and  instantaneously 
the  works  of  God  make  themselves  known,  compared 
with  this  pretended  salvation  by  Jesus  Christ. 

Psalm  19th.  "The  heavens  declare  the  glory  of  God  ; 
and  the  firmament  showeth  his  handy-work.  Day  unto 
day  uttereth  speech,  and  night  unto  night  showeth 
knowledge.  There  is  no  speech  nor  language,  where 
their  voice  is  not  heard.  Their  line  is  gone  out  through 
all  the  earth,  and  their  words  to  the  end  of  the  world. 
In  them  hath  he  set  a  tabernacle  for  the  sun,  which  is  as 
a  bridegroom  coming  out  of  his  chamber,  and  rejoiceth 
as  a  strong  man  to  run  a  race.  His  going  forth  is  from 
the  end  of  the  heaven,  and  his  circuit  unto  the  ends  of 
it ;  and  there  is  nothing  hid  from  the  heat  thereof. ' ' 

Now,  had  the  news  of  salvation  by  Jesus  Christ  been 
inscribed  on  the  face  of  the  sun  and  the  moon,  in 
characters  that  all  nations  would  have  understood,  the 
whole  earth  had  known  it  in  twenty-four  hours,  and  all 
nations  would  have  believed  it ;    whereas,  though  it  is 


AGE  OF   REASON.  249 

HOW  almost  2,000  years  since,  as  they  tell  us,  Christ 
came  upon  earth,  not  a  twentieth  part  of  the  people  of 
the  earth  know  any  thing  of  it,  and  among  those  who 
do,  the  wiser  part  do  not  believe  it. 

I  have  now,  reader,  gone  through  all  the  passages 
called  prophecies  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  shown  there  is  no 
such  thing. 

I  have  examined  the  story  told  of  Jesus  Christ,  and 
compared  the  several  circumstances  of  it  with  that  reve- 
lation which,  as  Middleton  wisely  says,  God  has  made 
to  us  of  his  power  and  wisdom  in  the  structure  of  the 
universe,  and  by  which  every  thing  ascribed  to  him  is  to 
be  tried.  The  result  is,  that  the  story  of  Christ  has  not 
one  trait,  either  in  its  character,  or  in  the  means  employ- 
ed, that  bears  the  least  resemblance  to  the  power  and 
wisdom  of  God,  as  demonstrated  in  the  creation  of  the 
universe.  All  the  means  are  human  means,  slow,  uncer- 
tain, and  inadequate  to  the  accomplishment  of  the  end 
proposed  ;  and  therefore  the  whole  is  a  fabulous  invention, 
and  undeserving  of  credit. 

The  priests  of  the  present  day  profess  to  believe  it. 
They  gain  their  living  by  it,  they  exclaim  against  some- 
thing they  call  infidelity.  I  will  define  what  it  is.  He 
THAT  BELIEVES  IN  THE  STORY  OF  CHRIST  IS  AN  IN- 
FIDEL TO  God. 


CONTRADICTORY    DOCTRINES 

IN   THE   NEW  TESTAMENT 

BETWEEN     MATTHEW    AND     MARK. 


IN  the  New  Testament^  Mark,  chap,  xvi.,  ver.  i6,  it 
is  said,  "He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be 
saved  ;  but  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned." 
This  is  making  salvation,  or,  in  other  words,  the  happi- 
ness of  man  after  this  life,  to  depend  entirely  on  believing, 
or  on  what  Christians  call  faith. 

But  the  25th  chapter  of  The  Gospel  according  to  Mat- 
thew makes  Jesus  Christ  to  preach  a  direct  contrary  doc- 
trine to  The  Gospel  according  to  Mark ;  for  it  makes  sal- 
vation, or  the  future  happiness  of  man,  to  depend  entirely 
on  good  works ;  and  those  good  works  are  not  works  done 
to  God,  for  he  needs  them  not,  but  good  works  done  to 
man. 

The  passage  referred  to  in  Matthew  is  the  account  there 
given  of  what  is  called  the  last  day,  or  the  day  of  judg- 
ment, where  the  whole  world  is  represented  to  be  divided 
into  two  parts,  the  righteous  and  the  unrighteous,  met- 
aphorically called  the  sheep  and  the  goats. 

To  the  one  part,  called  the  righteous,  or  the  sheep,  it 

"Come,  ye  blessed  of  my  Father,  inherit  the  king- 
dom prepared  for  you  from  the  foundation  of  the  world  : 
for  I  was  an  hungered,  and  ye  gave  me  meat :  I  was 
thirsty,  and  ye  gave  me  drink  :  I  was  a  stranger,  and  ye 
look  me  in  :  naked,  and  ye  clothed  me  :  I  was  sick,  and 
yc  visited  me  :  I  was  in  prison,  and  ye  came  unto  me. 


AGE   OK   REASOX.  25 1 

*'  Then  shall  the  righteous  answer  him,  saying,  Lord, 
when  saw  we  thee  an  hungered,  and  fed  thee?  or  thirsty, 
and  gave  thee  drink  ?  When  saw  we  thee  a  stranger,  and 
took  thee  in?  or  naked,  and  clothed  thee?  Or  when 
saw  we  thee  sick,  or  in  prison,  and  came  unto  thee? 

"  And  the  King  shall  answer  and  say  unto  them,  Verily 
I  say  unto  yoit,  Inasmurh  as  ye  have  done  it  unto  one  of 
the  least  of  these  my  brethren^  ye  have  done  it  unto  w^." 

Here  is  nothing  about  believing  in  Christ  —  nothing 
about  that  phantom  of  the  imagination  called  y2?///i.  The 
words  here  spoken  of  are  works  of  humanity  and  benev- 
olence, or  in  other  words,  an  endeavor  to  make  God's 
creation  happy.  Here  is  nothing  about  preaching  and 
making  long  prayers,  as  if  God  must  be  dictated  to  by 
man  :  nor  about  building  churches  and  meetings,  nor 
hiring  priests  to  pray  and  preach  in  them.  Here  is  noth- 
ing about  predestination,  that  lust  which  some  men  have 
for  damning  one  another.  Here  is  nothing  about  baptism, 
whether  by  sprinkling  or  plunging  ;  nor  about  any  of 
those  ceremonies  for  which  the  Ciiristian  church  has  been 
fighting,  persecuting,  and  burning  er.ch  other,  ever  since 
the  Christian  church  began. 

If  it  be  asked,  Why  do  not  priests  preach  the  doctrine 
contained  in  this  chapter?  the  answer  is  easy  —  they  are 
not  fond  of  practising  it  themselves.  It  does  not  answer 
for  their  trade.  They  had  rather  get  than  give.  Char- 
ity with  them  begins  and  ends  at  home. 

Had  it  been  said,  Come^  ye  blessed:  ye  have  been 
liberal  in  paying  the  preachers  of  the  word^  ye  have  con- 
tributed largely  towards  building  churches  and  meeting 
houses^  there  is  not  a  hired  priest  in  Christendom  but 
would  have  thundered  it  continually  in  the  ears  of  his 
congregation.  But  as  it  is  altogether  on  good  works 
done  to  men,  the  priests  pass  it  over  in  silence,  and  they 
will  abuse  me  for  bringing  it  into  notice. 

THOMAS   PAINE. 


AN  ESSAY  ON  DREAMS. 


AS  a  great  deal  is  said  in  the  New  Testament  about 
dreams,  it  is  first  necessary  to  explain  the  nature 
of  dreams,  and  to  show  by  what  operation  of 
the  mind  a  dream  is  produced  during  sleep.  When 
this  is  understood  we  shall  be  better  enabled  to  judge 
whether  any  reliance  can  be  placed  upon  them  ;  and 
consequently,  whether  the  several  matters  in  the  Neitr 
Testament  related  of  dreams  deserve  the  credit  which 
the  writers  of  that  book  and  priests  and  commentators 
ascribe  to  them. 

In  order  to  understand  the  nature  of  dreams,  or  of  that 
which  passes  in  ideal  vision  during  a  state  of  sleep,  it 
is  first  necessary  to  understand  the  composition  and 
decomposition  of  the  human  mind. 

The  three  great  faculties  of  the  mind  are  imagina- 
tion, JUDGMENT,  and  MEMORY.  Every  action  of  the 
mind  comes  under  one  or  other  of  these  faculties.  In  a 
state  of  wakefulness,  as  in  the  day-time,  these  three 
faculties  are  all  active :  but  that  is  seldom  the  case  in 
sleep,  and  never  perfectly  ;  and  this  is  the  cause  that  our 
dreams  are  not  so  regular  and  rational  as  our  waking 
thoughts. 

The  seat  of  that  collection  of  powers  or  faculties  that 
constitute  what   is   called   the   mind,   is  in  the  brain. 


AGE   OF   REASON.  253 

There  is  not,  and  cannot  be,  any  visible  demonstration 
of  this  anatomically,  but  accidents  happening  to  living 
persons  show  it  to  be  so.  An  injur>'  done  to  the  brain 
by  a  fracture  of  the  skull  will  sometimes  change  a  wise 
man  into  a  childish  idiot — a  being  without  mind.  But 
so  careful  has  nature  been  of  that  sanctum  sanctorum  of 
man,  the  brain,  that  of  all  the  external  accidents  to 
which  humanity  is  subject,  this  happens  the  most  seldom. 
But  we  often  see  it  happening  by  long  and  habitual 
intemperance. 

Whether  those  three  faculties  occupy  distinct  apart- 
ments of  the  brain,  is  known  only  to  that  Almighty 
power  that  formed  and  organized  it.  We  can  see  the 
external  effects  of  muscular  motion  in  all  the  members 
of  the  body,  though  its  primum  mobile^  or  first  moving 
cause,  is  unknown  to  man.  Our  external  motions  are 
sometimes  the  eflfect  of  intention,  and  sometimes  not. 
If  we  are  sitting  and  intend  to  rise,  or  standing  and 
intend  to  sit  or  to  walk,  the  limbs  obey  that  intention  as 
if  they  heard  the  order  given.  But  we  make  a  thousand 
motions  every  day,  and  that  as  well  waking  as  sleeping, 
that  have  no  prior  intention  to  direct  them.  Each 
member  acts  as  if  it  had  a  will  or  mind  of  its  own.  Man 
governs  the  whole  when  he  pleases  to  govern,  but  in  the 
interims  the  several  parts,  like  little  suburbs,  govern 
themselves  without  consulting  the  sovereign. 

But  all  these  motions,  whatever  be  the  generating 
cause,  are  external  and  visible.  But  with  respect  to  the 
brain,  no  ocular  observation  can  be  made  upon  it.  All 
is  mystery,  all  is  darkness  in  that  womb  of  thought. 

Whether  the  brain  is  a  mass  of  matter  in  continual  rest 

—  whether  it  has  a  vibrating  pulsative  motion,  or  a 
heaving  and  falling  motion,  like  matter  in  fermentation 

—  whether  different  parts  of  the  brain  have  different 
motions  according  to  the  faculty  that  is  employed,  be  it 
the  imagination,    the  judgment,   or  the  memory,    man 


254  -'^<^E   OF   REASON. 

kuows  nothing  of  it.  He  knows  not  the  cause  of  his 
own  wit :  his  own  brain  conceals  it  from  him. 

Comparing  invisible  by  visible  things,  as  metaphysical 
can  sometimes  be  compared  to  physical  things,  the  opera- 
tions of  these  distinct  and  several  faculties  have  some 
resemblance  to  the  mechanism  of  a  watch.  The  main- 
spring, which  puts  all  in  motion,  corresponds  to  the 
imagination  ;  the  pendulum  or  balance,  which  corrects 
and  regulates  that  motion,  corresponds  to  the  judgment ; 
and  the  hand  and  dial,  like  the  memory,  record  the 
operations. 

Now  in  proportion  as  these  several  faculties  sleep, 
slumber,  or  keep  awake,  during  the  continuance  of  a 
dream,  in  that  proportion  will  the  dream  be  reasonable 
or  frantic,  remembered  or  forgotten. 

If  there  is  any  faculty  in  mental  man  that  never  sleeps, 
it  is  that  volatile  thing,  the  imagination  :  the  case  is 
different  with  the  judgment  and  memory.  The  sedate 
and  sober  constitution  of  the  judgment  easily  disposes  it 
to  rest ;  and  as  to  the  memory,  it  records  in  silence,  and 
is  active  only  when  it  is  called  upon. 

That  the  judgment  soon  goes  to  sleep  may  be  perceived 
by  our  sometimes  beginning  to  dream  before  we  are  fully 
asleep  ourselves.  Some  random  thought  runs  in  the 
mind,  and  we  start,  as  it  were,  into  recollection  that  we 
are  dreaming  between  sleeping  and  waking. 

If  the  judgment  sleeps  whilst  the  imagination  keeps 
awake,  the  dream  will  be  a  riotous  assemblage  of  mis- 
shapen images,  and  ranting  ideas ;  and  the  more  active 
the  imagination  is,  the  wilder  the  dream  will  be.  The 
most  inconsistent  and  the  most  impossible  things  will 
appear  right,  because  that  faculty  whose  province  it  is  to 
keep  order  is  in  a  state  of  absence.  The  master  of  the 
school  is  gone  out,  and  the  boys  are  in  an  uproar. 

If  the  memory  sleeps,  we  shall  have  no  other  know- 
ledge of  the  dream  than  that  we  have  dreamt,  without 


AGE   OF    REASON.  255 

knowing  what  it  was  about.  In  this  case  it  is  sensation, 
rather  than  recollection,  that  acts.  The  dream  has  given 
US  some  sense  of  pain  or  trouble,  and  we  feel  it  as  a  hurt, 
rather  than  remember  it  as  a  vision. 

If  memor\'  only  slumbers,  we  shall  have  a  faint 
remembrance  of  the  dream,  and  after  a  few  minutes  it 
will  sometimes  happen  that  the  principal  passages  of  the 
dream  will  occur  to  us  more  fully.  The  cause  of  this  is, 
that  the  memory-  will  sometimes  continue  slumbering  or 
sleeping  after  we  are  awake  ourselves,  and  that  so  fully, 
that  it  may  and  sometimes  does  happen,  that  we  do  not 
immediately  recollect  where  we  are,  nor  what  we  have 
been  about,  or  what  we  have  to  do.  But  when  the 
memory  starts  into  wakefulness,  it  brings  the  knowledge 
of  these  things  back  upon  us  like  a  flood  of  light,  and 
sometimes  the  dream  with  it. 

But  the  most  curious  circumstance  of  the  mind  in  a 
state  of  dream,  is  the  power  it  has  to  become  the  agent 
of  every  person,  character,  and  thing  of  which  it  dreams. 
It  carries  on  conversation  with  several,  asks  questions, 
hears  answers,  gives  and  receives  infonnation,  and  it  acts 
all  these  parts  itself. 

But  however  various  and  eccentric  the  imaginaHon 
may  be  in  the  creation  of  images  and  ideas,  it  cannot 
supply  the  place  of  memor}-,  with  respect  to  things  that 
are  forgotten  when  we  are  awake.  For  example,  if  we 
have  forgotten  the  name  of  a  person,  and  dream  of  seeing 
him,  and  asking  him  his  name,  he  cannot  tell  it ;  for  it 
is  ourselves  asking  ourselves  the  question. 

But  though  the  imagination  cannot  supply  the  place 
of  real  memory,  it  has  the  wild  faculty  of  counterfeiting 
memory.  It  dreams  of  persons  it  never  knew,  and  talks 
with  them  as  if  it  remembered  them  as  old  acquaintances. 
It  relates  circumstances  that  never  happened,  and  tells 
them  as  if  they  had  happened.  It  goes  to  places  that 
never  existed,  and  knows  where  all  the  streets  and  houses 


256  AGE   OF   REASON. 

are,  as  if  it  had  been  there  before.  The  scenes  it  creates 
often  appear  as  scenes  remembered.  It  will  sometimes 
act  a  dream  within  a  dream,  and  in  the  delusion  of  dream- 
ing tell  a  dream  it  never  dreamed,  and  tell  it  as  if  it  was 
from  memory.  It  may  also  be  remarked,  that  the 
imagination  in  a  dream  has  no  idea  of  time  as  time.  It 
counts  only  by  circumstances ;  and  if  a  succession  of 
circumstances  pass  in  a  dream  that  would  require  a  great 
length  of  time  to  accomplish  them,  it  will  appear  to  the 
dreamer  that  a  length  of  time  equal  thereto  has  passed 
also. 

As  this  is  the  state  of  the  mind  in  dream,  it  may 
rationally  be  said  that  every  person  is  mad  once  in 
twenty-four  hours ;  for  were  he  to  act  in  the  day  as  he 
dreams  in  the  night,  he  would  be  confined  for  a  lunatic. 
In  a  state  of  wakefulness,  those  three  faculties  being  all 
active,  and  acting  in  unison,  constitute  the  rational  man. 
In  dreams  it  is  otherwise,  and,  therefore,  that  state  which 
is  called  insanity  appears  to  be  no  other  than  a  disunion 
of  those  faculties  and  a  cessation  of  the  judgment  during 
wakefulness,  that  we  so  often  experience  during  sleep ; 
and  idiocy^  into  which  some  persons  have  fallen,  is  that 
cessation  of  all  the  faculties  of  which  we  can  be  sensible 
when  we  happen  to  wake  before  our  memor}'. 

In  this  view  of  the  mind,  how  absurd  is  it  to  place 
reliance  upon  dreams,  and  how  much  more  absurd  to 
make  them  a  foundation  for  religion  !  yet  the  belief  that 
Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God,  begotten  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  a  being  never  heard  of  before,  stands  on  the  story 
of  an  old  man's  dream.  ''''And  behold  the  angel  of  the 
Lord  appeared  to  Joseph^  in  a  dream.,  saying.,  Joseph.,  than 
son  of  David.,  fear  not  thou  to  take  unto  thee  Mary  thy  wife  : 
for  that  which  is  conceived  in  her  is  of  the  Holy  Ghost. ' ' 
Matt  chap,  i.,  ver,  20. 

After  this  we  have  the  childish  stories  of  three  or  four 
other  dreams  ;  about  Joseph  going  into  Egypt ;  about  his 


AGE  OF   RKASON.  857 

coming  back  again  ;  about  this,  and  about  that ;  and  this 
story  of  dreams  has  thrown  Europe  into  a  dream  for  more 
than  a  thousand  years.  All  the  efforts  that  nature, 
reason,  and  conscience,  have  made  to  awaken  man  from 
it,  have  been  ascribed  by  priestcraft  and  superstition  to 
the  workings  of  the  devil ;  and  had  it  not  been  for  the 
American  revolution,  which,  by  estahUshiug  the untversa/ 
right  of  conscience,  first  opened  the  way  to  free  discussion, 
and  for  the  French  revolution  which  followed,  this  reli- 
gion of  dreams  had  continued  to  be  preached,  and  that 
after  it  had  ceased  to  be  believed.  Those  who  preached 
it  and  did  not  believe  it,  still  believed  the  delusion 
necessar>'.  They  were  not  bold  enough  to  be  honest, 
nor  honest  enough  to  be  bold. 

[Every  new  religion,  like  a  new  play,  requires  a  new 
apparatus  of  dresses  and  machinery,  to  fit  the  new 
characters  it  creates.  The  story  of  Christ  in  the  New 
Testament  brings  a  new  being  upon  the  stage,  which  it 
calls  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  the  story  of  Abraham  the 
father  of  the  Jews,  in  the  Old  Testament^  gives  existence 
to  a  new  order  of  beings  it  calls  angels.  There  was  no 
Holy  Ghost  before  the  time  of  Christ,  nor  angels  before 
the  time  of  Abraham,  We  hear  nothing  of  these  winged 
gentlemen,  till  more  than  two  thousand  years,  according 
to  the  Bible  chronolog\',  from  the  time  they  say  the 
heavens,  the  earth,  and  all  therein  were  made.  After 
this,  they  hop,  about  as  thick  as  birds  in  a  grove.  The 
first  we  hear  of  pays  his  addresses  to  Hagar  in  the  wilder- 
ness ;  then  three  of  them  visit  Sarah  ;  another  wrestles  a 
fall  with  Jacob  ;  and  these  birds  of  passage,  having  found 
their  way  to  earth  and  back,  are  continually  coming 
and  going.  They  eat  and  drink,  and  up  again  to 
heaven.         *         ♦         *         * 

One  would  think  that  a  system  loaded  with  such  gross 
and  vulgar  absurdities  as  scripture  religion  is,  could 
never  have  obtained   credit ;   yet   we   have   seen  what 


258  AGE   OF   REASON. 

priestcraft    and    fanaticism     could    do,    and    credulity 
believe. 

From  angels  in  the  Old  Testament  we  get  to  prophets, 
to  witches,  to  seers  of  visions,  and  dreamers  of  dreams, 
and  sometimes  we  are  told,  as  in  i  Sam.,  chap,  ix.,  ver.  15, 
that  God  whispers  in  the  ear.     kX  other  times  we  are  not 
told  how  the  impulse  was  given,  or  whether  sleeping  or 
waking.     In  2  Sam.,  chap,  xxiv,,  ver.  i,  it  says,  ^''And 
again  the  anger  of  the  Lord  was  kindled  against  Israel^ 
and  he  moved  David  against  them^  to  say^    Go  number 
Israel  and  Judah.^^ — And  in  i  Chron.,  chap,  xxi.,  ver.  i, 
when  the  same  story  is  again  related,  it  is  said,  '"''And 
Satan  stood  up  against  Israel^   and  provoked  David  to 
mimber  Israel. ' ' 

Whether  this  was  done  sleeping  or  waking  we  are  not 
told,  but  it  seems  that  David,  whom  they  call  "a  man 
after  God's  own  heart,"  did  not  know  by  what  spirit  he 
was  moved  ;  and  as  to  the  men  called  inspired  penmen, 
they  agree  so  well  about  the  matter,  that  in  one  book 
they  say  that  it  was  God,  and  in  the  other  that  it  was  the 
devil. 

Yet  this  is  the  trash  the  church  imposes  upon  the  world 
as  the  word  of  God  !  this  is  the  collection  of  tales  and 
contradictions  called  the  Holy  Bible !  this  is  the  rubbish 
called  revealed  religion  ! 

The  idea  that  writers  of  the  Old  Testament  had  of  a. 
God  was  boisterous,  contemptible,  and  vulgar.      They 
make  him   the  Mars  of  the  Jews,  the  fighting  God  of 
Israel,  the  conjuring  God  of  their  priests  and  prophets. 
They  tell  as  many  fables  of  him  as  the  Greeks  told  of 
Hercules.         *         *         *         * 

They  make  their  God  to  say  exultingly,  ^''I  will  get  me 
honor  upon  Pharaoh.,  and  upon  his  host.,  upon  his  chariots., 
and  upon  his  horsetnen.''''     And  that  he  may  keep  his 
word,  they  make  him  set  a  trap  in  the  Red  Sea,  in  the  dead 
of  the  night,   for  Pharaoh,  his  host,  and  his  horses,  and 


AGE  OF   REASON.  259 

drown  them  as  a  rat-catcher  would  do  so  nian>-  rats.  Great 
honor  indeed !  The  story  of  Jack  the  Giant-killer  is 
better  told  ! 

They  pit  hini  against  the  Egyptian  magicians  to 
conjure  with  him  ;  and  after  bad  conjuring  on  both  sides, 
(for  where  there  is  no  great  contest,  there  is  no  great 
honor,)  they  bring  him  off  victorious.  The  three  first 
essays  are  a  dead  match  ;  each  party  turns  his  rod  into 
a  serpent,  the  rivers  into  blood,  and  creates  frogs  ;  but 
upon  the  fourth,  the  God  of  the  Israelites  obtained  the 
laurel  —  he  covers  them  all  over  with  lice  !  The  Egyptian 
magicians  cannot  do  the  same,  and  this  lousy  triumph 
proclaims  the  victor)' ! 

They  make  their  God  to  rain  fire  and  brimstone  upon 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  and  belch  fire  and  smoke  upon 
mount  Sinai,  as  if  he  was  the  Pluto  of  the  lower  regions. 
They  made  him  salt  up  Lot's  wife  like  pickled  pork ; 
they  make  him  pass,  like  Shakspear's  Queen  Mab,  into 
the  brain  of  their  priests,  prophets  and  prophetesses,  and 
tickle  them  into  dreams ;  and  after  making  him  play  all 
kind  of  tricks,  they  confound  him  with  Satan,  and  leave 
us  at  a  loss  to  know  what  God  they  meant ! 

This  is  the  descriptive  God  of  the  Old  Testament ;  and 
as  to  the  Neu\  though  the  authors  of  it  have  varied  the 
scene,  they  continued  the  vulgarity. 

Is  man  ever  to  be  the  dupe  of  priestcraft,  the  slave  of 
superstition?  Is  he  never  to  have  just  ideas  of  his 
Creator?  It  is  better  not  to  believe  there  is  a  God 
than  to  believe  of  him  falsely.  When  we  behold  the 
mighty  universe  that  surrounds  us,  and  dart  our  con- 
templation into  the  eternity  of  space,  filled  with 
innumerable  orbs,  revolving  in  eternal  harmony,  how 
paltry  must  the  tales  of  the  O/a^and  New  Testaments, 
profanely  called  the  word  of  God,  appear  to  thoughtful 
man  !  The  stupendous  wisdom  and  unerring  order  that 
xeign  and  govern  throughout  this  wondrous  wliolc.    iid 


26o  AGE   OF   REASON. 

call  US  to  reflection,  put  to  shame  the  Bible! — The  God 
of  eternity  and  of  all  that  is  real  is  not  the  God  of  passing- 
dreams  and  shadows  of  man's  imagination  !  The  God  of 
truth  is  not  the  God  of  fable  ;  the  belief  of  a  God  begotten 
and  a  God  crucified  is  a  God  blasphemed.  It  is  making- 
a  profane  use  of  reason.  *] 

I  shall  conclude  this  Essay  on  Dreams  with  the  two 
first  verses  of  the  34th  chapter  of  Ecclesiasticus,  one  of 
the  books  of  the  Apocrypha. 

1  ''''The  hopes  of  a  man  void  of  understanding  are  vain 
and  false!  and  dreams  lift  up  fools. 

2  ''''Whoso  regardeth  dreams  is  like  him  thai  catchetk 
at  a  shadow^  and  followeth  after  the  wind. ' ' 

*The  portion  of  this  Essay  enclosed  in  brackets  does  not  appear 
in  the  edition  published  by  Mr.  Paine.  It  is  copied  from  an  edition 
of  his  works  published  by  W.  Carver,  No.  8  Elm  Street,  New  York^ 
and  R.  Carlile,  34  Fleet  Street,  London,  in  1824.  In  a  note  the  editor 
states  that  "having  obtained  the  original  in  the  hand-writing  of  Mr» 
Paine,  and  deeming  the  remarks  worthy  of  preservation,"  he  had 
thought  proper  to  restore  the  passage. 

The  Examination  of  the  Prophecies  was  published  by  Mr.  Paine  in. 
pamphlet  form  in  New  York  in  1807,  and  was  the  last  of  his  writings 
edited  by  himself.  He  declined  publishing  the  entire  works  he  had 
prepared,  says  the  above  named  editor,  observing  that  "  an  author 
might  lose  the  credit  he  had  acquired  by  writing  too  much."  This 
unfortunate  resolution  has  deprived  the  world  of  writings  that  can 
never  be  replaced. — E. 


MY   PRIVATE  THOUGHTS 

ON 

A    FUTURE    STATE. 


I  HAVE  said,  in  the  first  part  of  the  Age  of  Reason, 
that  "I  hope  for  happiness  after  this  life."  This 
hope  is  comfortable  to  me,  and  I  presume  not  to  go 
beyond  the  comfortable  idea  of  hope,  with  respect  to  a 
fnture  state. 

I  consider  myself  in  the  hands  of  my  Creator,  and  that 
he  will  dispose  of  me  after  this  life  consistently  with  his 
justice  and  goodness.  I  leave  all  these  matters  to  him  as 
my  Creator  and  friend,  and  I  hold  it  to  be  presumption  in 
man  to  make  an  article  of  faith  as  to  what  the  Creator 
will  do  with  us  hereafter. 

I  do  not  believe,  because  a  man  and  a  woman  make  a 
child,  that  it  imposes  on  the  Creator  the  unavoidable 
obligation  of  keeping  the  being  so  made  in  eternal  exist- 
ence hereafter.  It  is  in  his  power  to  do  so,  or  not  to 
do  so,  and  it  is  not  in  our  power  to  decide  which  he 
will  do. 

The  book  called  the  New  Testament^  which  I  hold  to 
be  fabulous  and  have  shown  to  be  false,  gives  an  account 
in  the  25th  chapter  of  Matthew,  of  what  is  there  called 
the  last  day,  or  the  day  of  judgment.  The  whole  world, 
according  to  that  account,  is  divided  into  two  parts,  the 
righteous  and  the  unrighteous,  figuratively  called  the 
sheep  and  the  goats.     They  are  then  to  receive  their 


262  AGE   OF   REASON. 

sentence.  To  the  one,  figuratively  called  the  sheep,  it 
says,  "Come,  ye  blessed  of  my  Father,  inherit  the 
kingdom  prepared  for  you  from  the  foundation  of  the 
world."  To  the  other,  figuratively  called  the  goats,  it 
says,  "Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire, 
prepared  for  the  Devil  and  his  angels." 

Now  the  case  is,  the  world  cannot  be  thus  divided  — 
the  moral  world,  like  the  physical  world,  is  composed  of 
numerous  degrees  of  character,  running  imperceptibly 
one  into  another,  in  such  a  manner  that  no  fixed  point 
of  division  can  be  found  in  either.  That  point  is  no- 
where or  is  everywhere.  The  whole  world  might  be 
divided  into  two  parts  numerically,  but  not  'as  to  moral 
character  ;  and  therefore  the  metaphor  of  dividing  them, 
as  sheep  and  goats  can  be  divided,  whose  difference  is 
marked  by  their  external  figure,  is  absurd.  All  sheep  are 
still  sheep  ;  all  goats  are  still  goats  :  it  is  their  physical 
nature  to  be  so.  But  one  part  of  the  world  are  not  all 
good  alike,  nor  the  other  part  all  wicked  alike.  There 
are  some  exceedingly  good  :  others  exceedingly  wicked. 
There  is  another  description  of  men  who  cannot  be  ranked 
with  either  the  one-  or  the  other.  They  belong  to 
neither  the  sheep  nor  the  goats. 

My  own  opinion  is,  that  those  whose  lives  have  been 
spent  in  doing  good  and  endeavoring  to  make  their 
fellow-mortals  happy — for  this  is  the  only  way  in  which 
we  can  serve  God  —  will  be  happy  hereafter;  and  that  the 
very  wicked  will  meet  with  some  punishment.  This  is 
my  opinion.  It  is  consistent  with  my  idea  of  God's 
justice,  and  with  the  reason  that  God  has  given  me. 

THOMAS   PAINE, 


AGE  OF  REASON, 

CONTAIMNH 

A  LETTER  TO  THE  HON.  THOMAS  ERSKINE 

ON    THE    l>RO«IEr(TTI*>N    OP    WILLIAMS    FOR   D  HLI^Iil^(i    THE   AliE   np   RIA80N. 

A     DISCOURSE 

DELTVKRKD  TO   THK   MH'IKTY   OP  THEOPUILANTBKOHIr'Tl'   AT   PAMM. 

LETTER  TO  CAMILLE  JORDAN. 

AN   ESSAY  ON    THH  ORIGIN  OF  FREH  MASONRY. 


K.\TKA<  T    IIP 


A  Reply  to  the  Bishop  of  Llandaff, 

AND   OTHKK    ARTICLKf, 
BV 

THOMAS    PAINE. 


PART  IV. 


New  York : 
PETER   ECKLER,   PUBLISHER. 

3.S  Fri.ioN  Strkkt. 


THOMAS    ERSKlNE.^g 


INTRODUCTION. 


IT  is  a  matter  of  surprise  to  some  people  to  see  Mr. 
Erskine  act  as  counsel  for  a  crown  prosecution  com- 
menced against  the  right  of  opinion :  *  I  confess  it  is 
none  to  me,  notwithstanding  all  that  Mr.  Erskine  has 
said  before  ;  for  it  is  difficult  to  know  when  a  lawyer  is 
to  be  believed  ;  I  have  always  observed  that  Mr.  Erskine, 
when  contending  as  a  counsel  for  the  right  of  political 
opinion,  frequently  took  occasions,  and  those  often 
dragged  in  head  and  shoulders,  to  lard  what  he  called 
the  British  Constitution,  with  a  great  deal  of  praise.  Yet 
the  same  Mr.  Erskine  said  to  me  in  conversation,  were 
Governments  to  begin  de  novo  in  England,  they  never 
would  establish  such  a  damned  absurdity  (it  was  exactly 
his  expression)  as  this  is.  Ought  I  then  to  be  surprised  at 
Mr.  Erskine  for  inconsistency  ? 
In  this  prosecution,  Mr.  Erskine  admits  the  right  of 

*  The  prosecution  of  Williams  for  publishing  the  Age  o/  Reason  was  not  a  "crown 
prosecution,"  but  was  commenced  (according  to  Lord  Campbell's  Lives  of  thf  Lord 
Chancellors,  vol.  vi,  page  39a)  by  "  The  Society  for  the  Suppression  of  Vice  and  Immo- 
rality," and  this  Society,  acting  as  prosecutors,  retained  Erskine  for  their  counsel.  His 
course  in  this  matter,  afler  having  so  eloquently  defended  Paine  before  the  Court  of 
King's  Bench  for  publishing  the  Rights  of  Man,  shows  that  while  Erskine  was  an 
earnest  advocate  for  political  liberty,  he  was  also  an  active  opponent  of  religious 
freedom.  It  is  this  inconsistency  in  conduct  and  reasoning  that  Mr.  Paine  criticises 
and  condemns;  and  Mr.  Erskine  virtually  admitted  his  error  by  returning  his  retain- 
ing feeafter  the  trial,  and  declining  "being  longer  concerned  for  the  Society,"  and  also 
by  pleading  for  mercy  for  Williams  after  his  conviction  and  before  hissentence.  His 
plea,  however,  was  in  vain,  and  Williams  was  sentenced  to  a  year's  imprisonment, 
with  hard  labor,  in  the  House  of  Correction  for  the  county  of  Middlesex.— ^rilrr. 


266  AGE   OF    REASON. 

controversy  ;  but  says  the  Christian  religion  is  not  to  be 
abused.  This  is  somewhat  sophistical,  because,  while 
he  admits  the  rights  of  controversy,  he  reserves  the  right 
of  calling  that  controversy  abuse  :  and  thus,  lawyer-like, 
undoes  by  one  word  what  he  says  in  the  other.  I  will, 
however,  in  this  letter  keep  within  the  limits  he  pre- 
scribes ;  he  will  find  here  nothing  about  the  Christian 
religion  :  he  will  find  only  a  statement  of  a  few  cases, 
which  shows  the  necessity  of  examining  the  books  handed 
to  us  from  the  Jews,  in  order  to  discover  if  we  have  not 
been  imposed  upon  ;  together  with  some  observations  on 
the  manner  in  which  the  trial  of  Williams  has  been  con- 
ducted. If  Mr.  Erskine  denies  the  right  of  examining 
those  books,  he  had  better  profess  himself  at  once  an  ad- 
vocate for  the  establishment  of  an  Inquisition,  and  the 
re-establishment  of  the  Star-Chamber. 

THOMAS  PAINE. 


A  LETTER  TO  THE  HON.  T.  ERSKINE,' 

ON  THE  PROSECUTION  OF  THOMAS  WILLIAMS, 

FOR    PUBLISHING    THE    AGE    OF    REASON. 


OF  all  the  tjTannies  that  afflict  mankind,  tyranny 
in  religion  is  the  worst :  every  other  species  of 
tyranny  is  limited  to  the  world  we  live  in ;  but 
this  attempts  a  stride  beyond  the  grave,  and  seeks  to 
pursue  us  into  eternity.  It  is  there  and  not  here  —  it  is 
to  God  and  not  to  man — it  is  to  a  heavenly  and  not  to  an 
earthly  tribunal  that  we  are  to  account  for  our  belief;  if 
then  we  believe  falsely  and  dishonorably  of  the  Creator, 
and  that  belief  is  forced  upon  us,  as  far  as  force  can 
operate  by  human  laws  and  human  tribunals, — on  whom 
is  the  criminality  of  that  belief  to  fall?  on  those  who 
impose  it,  or  on  those  on  whom  it  is  imposed  ? 

A  bookseller  of  the  name  of  Williams  has  been 
prosecuted  in  London  on  a  charge  of  blasphemy,  for 
publishing  a  book  entitled  the  Age  of  Reason.  Blas- 
phemy is  a  word  of  vast  sound,  but  equivocal  and  almost 
indefinite  signification,  unless  we  confine  it  to  the  simple 
idea  of  hurting  or  injuring  the  reputation  of  any  one, 
which  was  its  original  meaning.     As  a  word,  it  existed 

•  Mr.  Paine  has  evidently  incorporated  into  this  Letter  a  portion  of 
his  answer  to  Bishop  Watson's  Apolofy  for  the  Bible,  as  in  a  subse- 
quent chapter  of  that  work,  treating  of  the  book  of  Genesis,  he  ex- 
pressly refers  to  his  remarks  in  a  preceding  part  of  the  same  on  the 
two  accounts  of  the  creation  contained  in  that  book,  which  is  in- 
cluded in  this  XeXi^r.— Editor. 


268  AGE   OF   REASON. 

before  Christianity  existed,  being  a  Greek  word,  or  Greek 
anglofied,  as  all  the  etymological  dictionaries  will 
show. 

But  behold  how  various  and  contradictory  have  been 
the  signification  and  application  of  this  equivocal  word. 
Socrates,  who  lived  more  than  four  hundred  years  before 
the  Christian  era,  was  convicted  of  blasphemy  for  preach- 
ing against  the  belief  of  a  plurality  of  gods,  and  for 
preaching  the  belief  of  one  god,  and  was  condemned  to 
suffer  death  by  poison.  Jesus  Christ  was  convicted  of 
blasphemy  under  the  Jewish  law,  and  was  crucified. 
Calling  Mahomet  an  impostor  would  be  blasphemy  in 
Turkey ;  and  denying  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope,  and 
the  Church,  would  be  blasphemy  at  Rome.  What  then 
is  to  be  understood  by  this  word  blasphemy?  We  see 
that  in  the  case  of  Socrates  truth  was  condemned  as 
blasphemy?  Are  we  sure  that  truth  is  not  blasphemy 
in  the  present  day?  Woe,  however,  be  to  those  who 
make  it  so,  whoever  they  may  be. 

A  book  called  the  Bible  has  been  voted  by  men,  and 
decreed  by  human  laws  to  be  the  word  of  God  ;  and  the 
disbelief  of  this  is  called  blasphemy.  But  if  the  Bible 
be  not  the  word  of  God,  it  is  the  laws  and  the  execution 
of  them  that  is  blasphemy,  and  not  the  disbelief. 
Strange  stories  are  told  of  the  Creator  in  that  book.  He 
is  represented  as  acting  under  the  influence  of  every  human 
passion,  even  of  the  most  malignant  kind.  If  these 
stories  are  false,  we  err  in  believing  them  to  be  true,  and 
ought  not  to  believe  them.  It  is,  therefore,  a  duty  which 
every  man  owes  to  himself,  and  reverentially  to  his 
Maker,  to  ascertain,  by  every  possible  inquiry,  whether 
there  be  sufficient  evidence  to  believe  them  or  not. 

My  own  opinion  is  decidedly  that  the  evidence  does 
not  warrant  the  belief,  and  that  we  sin  in  forcing  that 
belief  upon  ourselves  and  upon  others.  In  saying  this, 
I  have  no  other  object  in  view  than  truth.     But  that  I 


AGE  OF   REASON.  269 

may  not  be  accused  of  resting  upon  bare  assertion  with 
respect  to  the  equivocal  state  of  the  Bible,  I  will  produce 
an  example,  and  I  will  not  pick  and  cull  the  Bible  for 
the  purpose.  I  will  go  fairly  to  the  case  :  I  will  take  the 
two  first  chapters  of  Genesis  as  they  stand,  and  show 
from  thence  the  truth  of  what  I  say,  that  is,  that  the 
evidence  does  not  warrant  the  belief  that  the  Bible  is  the 
word  of  God. 


CHAPTER  I. 

1  In  the  beginning  God  created  the  heaven  and  the 
earth. 

2  And  the  earth  was  without  form,  and  void ;  and 
darkness  was  upon  the  face  of  the  deep.  And  the  spirit 
of  God  moved  upon  the  face  of  the  waters. 

3  And  God  said,  Let  there  be  light ;  and  there  wai 
light. 

4  And  God  saw  the  light,  that  it  was  good  :  and  God 
divided  the  light  from  the  darkness. 

5  And  God  called  the  light  day,  and  the  darkness 
he  called  night :  and  the  evening  and  the  morning  were 
the  first  day. 

6  And  God  said.  Let  there  be  a  firmament  in  the 
midst  of  the  waters,  and  let  it  divide  the  waters  from  the 
waters. 

7  And  God  made  the  firmament,  and  divided  the 
waters  which  were  under  the  firmament,  from  the  waters 
which  were  above  the  firmament :  and  it  was  so. 

8  And  God  called  the  firmament  heaven :  and  the 
evening  and  the  morning  were  the  second  day. 

9  And  God  said,  Let  the  waters  under  the  heaven  be 
gathered  together  unto  one  place,  and  let  the  dry  land 
appear  :  and  it  was  so. 


270  AGE   OF   REASON. 

ID  And  God  called  the  dry  land  earth,  and  the  gather- 
ing together  of  the  waters  called  he  seas :  and  God  saw 
that  it  was  good. 

11  And  God  said,  Let  the  earth  bring  forth  grass, 
the  herb,  yielding  seed,  and  the  fruit-tree  yielding  fruit 
after  his  kind,  whose  seed  is  in  itself,  upon  the  earth : 
and  it  was  so. 

12  And  the  earth  brought  forth  grass,  a7id  herb  yield- 
ing seed  after  his  kind ;  and  the  tree  yielding  fruit, 
whose  seed  was  in  itself,  after  his  kind  :  and  God  saw  that 
it  was  good. 

13  And  the  evening  and  the  morning  were  the  third 
day. 

14  \  And  God  said.  Let  there  be  lights  in  the  firmament 
of  the  heaven,  to  divide  the  day  from  the  night :  and  let 
them  be  for  signs,  and  for  seasons,  and  for  days,  and 
years. 

15  And  let  them  be  for  lights  in  the  firmament  of 
the  heaven,  to  give  light  upon  the  earth  :  and  it  was  so. 

16  And  God  made  two  great  lights  ;  the  greater  light 
to  rule  the  day,  and  the  lesser  light  to  rule  the  night :  he 
made  the  stars  also. 

17  And  God  set  them  in  the  firmament  of  the  heaven 
to  give  light  upon  the  earth. 

18  And  to  rule  over  the  day  and  over  the  night,  and 
to  divide  the  light  from  the  darkness  :  and  God  saw  that 
it  was  good. 

19  And  the  evening  and  the  morning  were  the  fourth 
day. 

20  And  God  said,  Let  the  waters  bring  forth  abun- 
dantly the  moving  creature  that  hath  life,  and  fowl  that 
may  fly  above  the  earth  in  the  open  firmament  of  heaven. 

21  And  God  created  great  whales,  and  every  living 
creature  that  moveth,  which  the  waters  brought  forth 
abundantly,  after  their  kind,  and  every  winged  fowl  after 
his  kind  :  and  God  saw  that  it  was  good. 


AGE  OF   REASON.  2/1 

22  And  God  blessed  them,  sayiug,  Be  fruitful,  and 
multiply,  and  fill  the  waters  in  the  seas,  and  let  fowl 
multiply  in  the  earth. 

23  And  the  evening  and  the  morning  were  the  fifth 
day. 

24  And  God  said,  Let  the  earth  bring  forth  the  living 
creature  after  his  kind,  cattle  and  creeping  things  and 
beast  of  the  earth  after  his  kind  :  and  it  was  so. 

25  And  God  made  the  beast  of  the  earth  after  his 
kind,  and  cattle  after  their  kind,  and  every  thing  that 
creepeth  upon  the  earth  after  his  kind  :  and  God  saw 
that  it  was  good. 

26  1  And  God  said,  Let  us  make  man  in  our  image, 
after  our  likeness  :  and  let  them  have  dominion  over  the 
fish  of  the  sea,  and  over  the  fowl  of  the  air,  and  over  the 
cattle,  and  over  all  the  earth,  and  over  every  creeping 
thing  that  creepeth  upon  the  earth. 

zy  So  God  created  man  in  his  own  image ^  in  the 
image  0/  God  created  he  him ;  male  and  female  created 
he  them. 

28  And  God  blessed  them^  and  God  said  unto  them^ 
Be  fruitful^  and  multiply,  and  replenish  the  earthy  and 
subdue  it;  and  have  dominion  over  the  fish  of  the  sea^  and 
over  the  fowl  of  the  air^  and  over  every  living  thing  that 
moveth  upon  the  earth. 

29  \  And  God  said,  Behold,  I  have  given  you  every 
herb  bearing  seed,  which  is  upon  the  face  of  all  the  earth, 
and  every  tree,  in  the  which  is  the  fruit  of  a  tree  yielding 
seed  :  to  you  it  shall  be  for  meat. 

30  And  to  every  beast  of  the  earth,  and  to  every  fowl 
of  the  air  and  to  every  thing  that  creepeth  upon  the 
earth,  wherein  there  is  life,  I  have  given  every  green  herb 
for  meat :  and  it  was  so. 

31  And  God  saw  ever}-  thing  that  he  had  made,  and 
behold  it  was  very  good.  And  the  evening  and  the 
morning  were  the  sixth  day. 


272  AGE   OF   REASON. 


CHAPTER  II. 

1  Thus  the  heavens  and  the  earth  were  finished,  and 
all  the  host  of  them. 

2  And  on  the  seventh  day  God  ended  his  work  which 
he  had  made,  and  he  rested  on  the  seventh  day  from  all 
his  work  which  he  had  made. 

3  And  God  blessed  the  seventh  day  and  sanctified  it ; 
because  that  in  it  he  had  rested  from  all  his  work,  which 
God  created  and  made. 


4  These  are  the  generations  of  the  heavens  and  of 
the  earth,  when  they  were  created ;  in  the  day  that  the 
Lord  God  made  the  earth  and  the  heavens. 

5  And  ever}'  plant  of  the  field,  before  it  was  in  the 
earth,  and  every  herb  of  the  field,  before  it  grew  ;  for 
the  Lord  God  had  not  caused  it  to  rain  upon  the  earth, 
and  there  was  not  a  man  to  till  the  ground, 

6  But  there  went  up  a  mist  from  the  earth,  and 
watered  the  whole  face  of  the  ground. 

7  And  the  Lord  God  formed  man  of  the  dust  of  the 
ground,  and  breathed  into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  life  ; 
and  man  became  a  living  soul. 

8  T[  And  the  Lord  God  planted  a  garden  eastward  in 
Eden  :  and  there  he  put  the  man  whom  he  had  formed. 

9  And  out  of  the  ground  made  the  Lord  God  to 
grow  every  tree  that  is  pleasant  to  the  sight,  and  good 
for  food  ;  the  tree  of  life  also  in  the  midst  of  the  garden, 
and  the  tree  of  knowledge  of  good  and  evil. 

10  And  a  river  went  out  of  Eden  to  water  the  garden  ; 
and  from  thence  it  was  parted,  and  became  into  four 
heads. 

11  The  name  of  the  first  is  Pison  :    that  is  it  which 


AGE   OF   REASON.  273 

compasseth  the  whole  land  of  Havilah,  where  there  is 
gold. 

12  And  the  gold  of  that  land  is  good:  there  is 
bdellium  and  the  onyx-stone. 

13  And  the  name  of  the  second  river  is  Gihon :  the 
same  is  it  that  compasseth  the  whole  land  of  Ethiopia. 

14  And  the  name  of  the  third  river  is  Hiddekel : 
that  is  it  which  goeth  toward  the  east  of  Assyria.  And 
the  fourth  river  is  Euphrates. 

15  And  the  Lord  God  took  the  man,  and  put  him 
into  the  garden  of  Eden,  to  dress  it  and  to  keep  it 

16  1  And  the  Lord  God  commanded  the  man,  saying, 
of  every  tree  of  the  garden  thou  mayest  freely  eat : 

1 7  But  of  the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil, 
thou  shalt  not  eat  of  it ;  for  in  the  day  that  thou  eatest 
thereof,  thou  shalt  surely  die. 

18  1  And  the  Lord  God  said,  it  is  not  good  that  the 
man  should  be  alone  :  I  will  make  him  an  help  meet  for 
him. 

19  And  out  of  the  ground  the  Lord  God  fonned 
every  beast  of  the  field,  and  every  fowl  of  the  air,  and 
brought  them  unto  Adam,  to  see  what  he  would  call 
them ;  and  whatsoever  Adam  called  every  living 
creature,  that  was  the  name  thereof. 

20  And  Adam  gave  names  to  all  cattle,  and  to  the 
fowl  of  the  air,  and  to  every  beast  of  the  field ;  but  for 
Adam  there  was  not  found  an  help  meet  for  him. 

21  1  And  the  Lord  God  caused  a  deep  sleep  to  fall 
upon  Adam,  and  he  slept ;  and  he  took  one  of  his  ribs, 
and  closed  up  the  flesh  instead  thereof: 

22  And  the  rib,  which  the  Lord  God  had  taken  from 
man,  made  he  a  woman,  and  brought  her  unto  the  man. 

23  And  Adam  said,  this  is  now  bone  of  my  bones, 
and  flesh  of  my  flesh :  she  shall  be  called  Woman, 
because  she  was  taken  out  of  man. 

24  Therefore  shall  a  man   leave  his   father  and   his 


274  AGK   OF   REASON. 

mother,  and  shall  cleave  unto  his  wife :  and  they  shall 
he  one  flesh . 

25  And  they  were  both  naked,  the  man  and  his  wife, 
and  were  not  ashamed. 


These  two  chapters  are  called  the  Mosaic  account  of 
the  creation  ;  and  we  are  told,  nobody  knows  by  whom, 
that  Moses  was  instructed  by  God  to  write  that  account. 

It  has  happened  that  every  nation  of  people  have  been 
world-makers ;  and  each  makes  the  world  to  begin  his 
own  way,  as  if  they  had  all  been  brought  up,  as  Hudibras 
says,  to  the  trade.  There  are  hundreds  of  different 
opinions  and  traditions  how  the  world  began.  My 
business,  however,  in  this  place,  is  only  with  these  two 
chapters. 

I  begin  then  by  saying,  that  these  two  chapters, 
instead  of  containing,  as  has  been  believed,  one  continued 
account  of  the  creation,  written  by  Moses,  contain  two 
different  and  contradictory  stories  of  a  creation,  made  by 
two  different  persons,  and  written  in  two  different  styles 
of  expression.  The  evidence  that  shows  this  is  so  clear 
when  attended  to  without  prejudice,  that,  did  we  meet 
with  the  same  evidence  in  any  Arabic  or  Chinese  account 
of  a  creation,  we  should  not  hesitate  in  pronouncing  it  a 
forger\'. 

I  proceed  to  distinguish  the  two  stories  from  each 
other. 

The  first  story  begins  at  the  first  verse  of  the  first 
chapter,  and  ends  at  the  end  of  the  third  verse  of  the 
second  chapter;  for  the  adverbial  conjunction.  Thus, 
with  which  the  second  chapter  begins,  (as  the  reader  will 
see),  connects  itself  to  the  last  verse  of  the  first  chapter, 
and  those  three  verses  belong  to  and  make  the  conclusion 
of  the  first  story. 

The  second  story   begins  at  the  fourth  verse  of  the 


AGE  OF   REASON.  275 

second  chapter,  and  ends  with  that  chapter.  These  two 
stories  have  been  confused  into  one,  by  cutting  off  the 
tjiree  last  verses  of  the  first  story,  and  throwing  them  to 
the  second  chapter. 

I  go  now  to  show  that  these  stories  have  been  written 
by  two  different  persons. 

From  the  first  verse  of  the  first  chapter  to  the  end  of 
the  third  verse  of  the  second  chapter,  which  makes  the 
whole  of  the  first  story,  the  word  God  is  used  without 
any  epithet  or  additional  word  conjoined  with  it,  as  the 
reader  will  see :  and  this  style  of  expression  is  invariably 
used  throughout  the  whole  of  this  story,  and  is  repeated 
no  less  than  thirty-five  times,  viz:  "In  the  beginning 
God  created  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  and  the  spirit  of 
God  moved  on  the  face  of  the  waters,  and  God  said  let 
there  be  light,  and  God  saw  the  light,"  &c.,  &c. 

But  immediately  from  the  beginning  of  the  fourth 
verse  of  the  second  chapter,  where  the  second  stor>' 
begins,  the  style  of  expression  is  always  the  £j3rd  God^ 
and  this  st)'le  of  expression  is  invariably  used  to  the  end 
of  the  chapter,  and  is  repeated  eleven  times  ;  in  the  one 
it  is  always  God,  and  never  the  Lord  God;  in  the  other 
it  is  always  the  Lord  God^  and  never  God.  The  first 
story  contains  thirty-four  verses,  and  repeats  the  single 
word  God  thirty-five  times ;  the  second  story  contains 
twenty-two  verses,  and  repeats  the  compound  word 
Lord-God  eleven  times.  This  difference  of  style,  so 
often  repeated,  and  so  uniformly  continued,  shows,  that 
these  two  chapters,  containing  two  different  stories,  are 
written  by  different  persons :  it  is  the  same  in  all  the 
different  editions  of  the  Bible,  in  all  the  languages  I  have 
seen. 

Having  thus  shown,  from  the  difference  of  style,  that 
these  two  chapters,  divided  as  they  properly  divide  them- 
selves, at  the  end  of  the  third  verse  of  the  second  chapter, 
are  the  work  of  two  different  persons,  I  come  to  show, 


276  AGE   OF   REASON. 

from  the  contradictory  matters  they  contain,  that  they 
cannot  be  the  work  of  one  person,  and  are  two  diflferent 
stories. 

It  is  impossible,  unless  the  writer  was  a  lunatic  without 
memory,  that  one  and  the  same  person  could  say,  as  is 
said  in  the  27th  and  28th  verses  of  the  first  chapter — ^^So 
Goa  created  man  in  his  own  image ^  in  the  itnage  of  God 
created  he  him ;  m.ale  and  female  created  he  them:  and 
God  blessed  them^  and  God  said  unto  them,^  be  fruitful  and 
multiply^  andreplenish  the  earthy  and  subdue  it ^  and  have 
dominion  over  the  fish  of  the  sea^  and  over  the  fowls  of  the 
air^  and  over  every  living  thing  that  moveth  on  the  face  of 
the  earth.' ^  —  It  is,  I  say,  impossible  that  the  same  person 
who  said  this  could  afterwards  say,  as  is  said  in  the 
second  chapter,  ver,  5,  and  there  was  not  a  man  to  till 
the  ground;  and  then  proceed  in  the  7th  verse  to  give 
another  account  of  the  making  a  man  for  the  first  time, 
and  afterwards  of  the  making  a  woman  out  of  his  rib. 

Again,  one  and  the  same  person  could  not  write,  as  is 
written  in  the  29th  verse  of  the  first  chapter ;  ' '  Behold 
I  (God)  have  given  you  every  herb  bearing  seed,  which 
is  upon  the  face  of  all  the  earth,  and  every  tree,  in  the 
which  is  the  fruit  of  a  tree  yielding  seed  :  to  you  it  shall 
be  for  meat, ' '  and  afterwards  say,  as  is  said  in  the  second 
chapter,  that  the  Lord  God  planted  a  tree  in  the  midst  of 
a  garden,  and  forbade  man  to  eat  thereof 

Again,  one  and  the  same  person  could  not  say,  "  Thus 
the  heavens  and  the  earth  were  finished^  and  all  the  host 
of  them.,  and  on  the  seventh  day  God  ended  his  work 
which  he  had  made ;^'^  and  shortly  after  set  the  Creator 
to  work  again,  to  plant  a  garden,  to  make  a  man  and  a 
woman,  &c.,  as  is  done  in  the  second  chapter. 

Here  are  evidently  two  different  stories  contradicting 
each  other.  —  According  to  the  first,  the  two  sexes,  the 
male  and  the  female,  were  made  at  the  same  time. 
According  to  the  second  they  were  made  at  diflferent 


AGE  OF   REASON.  277 

times  :  the  man  first,  the  woman  afterwards.  According 
to  the  first  story,  they  w^ere  to  have  dominion  over  all  the 
earth.  According  to  the  second,  their  dominion  was 
limited  to  a  garden.  How  large  a  garden  it  could  be, 
that  one  man  and  one  woman  could  dress  and  keep  in 
order,  I  leave  to  the  prosecutor,  the  judge,  the  jury,  and 
Mr.  Erskine,  to  determine. 

The  story  of  the  talking  serpent,  and  its  tdte-a-t^te 
with  Eve;  the  doleful  adventure,  called  th^  Fall  of  Man  ; 
and  how  he  was  turned  out  of  this  fine  garden,  and  how 
the  garden  was  afterwards  locked  up  and  guarded  by  a 
flaming  sword  (if  any  one  can  tell  what  a  flaming  sword 
is),  belong  altogether  to  the  second  story.  They  have 
no  connection  with  the  first  story.  According  to  the 
first  there  was  no  garden  of  Eden  ;  no  forbidden  tree : 
the  scene  was  the  whole  earth,  and  the  fruit  of  all  the 
trees  was  allowed  to  be  eaten. 

In  giving  this  example  of  the  strange  state  of  the 
Bible,  it  cannot  be  said  I  have  gone  out  of  my  way  to 
seek  it,  for  I  have  taken  the  beginning  of  the  book  ;  nor 
can  it  be  said  I  have  made  more  of  it,  than  it  makes 
of  itself.  That  there  are  two  stories  is  as  visible  to  the 
eye,  when  attended  to,  as  that  there  are  two  chapters, 
and  that  they  have  been  written  by  different  persons, 
nobody  knows  by  whom.  If  this,  then,  is  the  strange 
condition  the  beginning  of  the  Bible  is  in,  it  leads  to  a 
just  suspicion,  that  the  other  parts  are  no  better,  and 
consequently  it  becomes  every  man's  duty  to  examine 
the  case.  I  have  done  it  for  myself,  and  am  satisfied 
that  the  Bible  \s  fabulous. 

Perhaps  I  shall  be  told  in  the  cant  language  of  the  day, 
as  I  have  often  been  told  by  the  Bishop  of  Llandaff"  and 
others,  of  the  great  and  laudable  pains  that  many  pious 
and  learned  men  have  taken  to  explain  the  obscure,  and 
reconcile  the  contradictory,  or,  as  they  say,  the  seemingly 
contradictory  passages  of  the  Bible.     It  is  because  the 


278  AGE   OF   REASON. 

Bible  needs  such  an  undertaking,  that  is  one  of  the  first 
causes  to  suspect  it  is  not  the  word  of  God  :  this  single 
reflection,  when  carried  home  to  the  mind,  is  in  itself  a 
volume. 

What !  does  not  the  Creator  of  the  Universe,  the 
Fountain  of  all  Wisdom,  the  Origin  of  all  Science, 
the  Author  of  all  Knowledge,  the  God  of  Order  and  of 
Harmony,  know  how  to  write?  When  we  contemplate 
the  vast  economy  of  the  creation  ;  when  we  behold  the 
unerring .  regularity  of  the  visible  solar  system,  the 
perfection  with  which  all  its  several  parts  revolve,  and 
by  corresponding  assemblage,  form  a  whole  ; — when  we 
launch  our  eye  into  the  boundless  ocean  of  space,  and 
see  ourselves  surrounded  by  innumerable  worlds,  not  one 
of  which  varies  from  its  appointed  place — when  we  trace 
the  power  of  a  Creator  from  a  mite  to  an  elephant,  from 
an  atom  to  a  universe,  can  we  suppose  that  the  mind 
that  could  conceive  such  a  design,  and  the  power  that 
executed  it  with  incomparable  perfection,  cannot  write 
without  inconsistency,  or  that  a  book  so  written  can  be 
the  work  of  such  a  power?  The  writings  of  Thomas 
Paine,  even  of  Thomas  Paine,  need  no  commentator  to 
explain,  expound;  arrange,  and  re-arrange  their  several 
parts,  to  render  them  intelligible — he  can  relate  a  fact, 
or  write  an  essay,  without  forgetting  in  one  page  what 
he  has  written  in  another  ;  certainly  then,  did  the  God 
of  all  perfection  condescend  to  write  or  dictate  a  book, 
that  book  would  be  as  perfect  as  himself  is  perfect.  The 
Bible  is  not  so,  and  it  is  confessedly  not  so  by  the  at- 
tempts to  amend  it. 

Perhaps  I  shall  be  told,  that  though  I  have  produced 
one  instance,  I  cannot  produce  another  of  equal  force. 
One  is  sufficient  to  call  in  question  the  genuineness  or 
authenticity  of  any  book  that  pretends  to  be  the  word  of 
God  ;  for  such  a  book  would,  as  before  said,  be  as  perfect 
as  its  author  is  perfect. 


AGE  OF  REASOiN'.  279 

I  will,  however,  advance  only  four  chapters  further  into 
the  book  of  Genesis,  and  produce  another  example  that 
is  sufficient  to  invalidate  the  story  to  which  it  belongs. 

We  have  all  heard  of  Noah's  flood,  and  it  is  impossible 
to  think  ofthe  whole  human  race,  men,  women,  children, 
and  infants  (except  one  family)  deliberately  drowning, 
without  feeling  a  painful  sensation.  That  heart  must  be 
a  heart  of  flint  that  can  contemplate  such  a  scene  with 
tranquillity.  There  is  nothing  in  the  ancient  mythology, 
nor  in  the  religion  of  any  people  we  know  of  upon  the 
globe,  that  records  a  sentence  of  their  God,  or  of  their 
Gods,  so  tremendously  severe  and  merciless.  If  the  story 
be  not  true,  we  blasphemously  dishonor  God  by  believing 
it,  and  still  more  so  in  forcing,  by  laws  and  penalties, 
that  belief  upon  others.  I  go  now  to  show  from  the  face 
of  the  story,  that  it  carries  the  evidence  of  not  being 
true. 

I  know  not  if  the  judge,  the  jury,  and  Mr.  Erskine, 
who  tried  and  convicted  Williams,  ever  read  the  Bible, 
or  know  any  thing  of  its  contents,  and  therefore  I  will 
state  the  case  precisely. 

There  were  no  such  people  as  Jews  or  Israelites,  in  the 
time  that  Noah  is  said  to  have  lived,  and  consequentl} 
there  was  no  such  law  as  that  which  is  called  the  Jewish 
or  Mosaic  Law.  It  is,  according  to  the  Bible,  more  than 
six  hundred  years  from  the  time  the  flood  is  said  to  have 
happened,  to  the  time  of  Moses,  and  consequently  the 
time  the  flood  is  said  to  have  happened  was  more  than 
six  hundred  years  prior  to  the  law  called  the  law  of 
Moses,-  even  admitting  Moses  to  have  been  the  giver  of 
that  law,  of  which  there  is  great  cause  to  doubt. 

We  have  here  two  different  epochs,  or  points  of  time ; 
that  of  the  flood,  and  that  of  the  law  of  Moses ;  the 
former  more  than  six  hundred  years  prior  to  the  latter. 
But  the  maker  of  the  story  of  the  flood,  whoever  he  was, 
has  betrayed  himself  by  blunder'ng,  for  he  has  reserved 


28o  AGE   OF   REASON. 

the  order  of  times.  He  has  told  the  stor}-  as  if  the  law 
of  Moses  was  prior  to  the  flood  ;  for  he  has  made  God  to 
say  to  Noah,  Genesis,  chap,  vii.,  ver.  2,  "  Of  every  clean 
beast,  thou  shalt  take  to  thee  by  sevens,  the  male  and 
his  female,  and  of  beasts  that  are  not  clean  by  two,  the 
male  and  his  female."  This  is  the  Mosaic  law,  and 
could  only  be  said  after  that  law  was  given,  not  before. 
There  was  no  such  things  as  beasts  clean  and  unclean  in 
the  time  of  Noah, — it  is  nowhere  said  they  were  created 
so.  They  were  only  declared  to  be  so,  as  meats^  by  the 
Mosaic  law,  and  that  to  the  Jews  only,  and  there  was  no 
such  people  as  Jews  in  the  time  of  Noah.  This  is  the 
blundering  condition  in  which  this  strange  story  stands. 

When  we  reflect  on  a  sentence  so  tremendously  severe 
as  that  of  consigning  the  whole  human  race,  eight 
persons  excepted,  to  deliberate  drowning ;  a  sentence 
which  represents  the  Creator  in  a  more  merciless 
character  than  any  of  those  whom  we  call  Pagans  ever 
represented  the  Creator  to  be  under  the  figure  of  any  of 
their  deities,  we  ought  at  least  to  suspend  our  belief  of  it, 
on  a  comparison  of  the  beneficent  character  of  the 
Creator  with  the  tremendous  severity  of  the  sentence ; 
but  when  we  see  the  story  told  with  such  an  evident 
contradiction  of  circumstances,  we  ought  to  set  it  down 
for  nothing  better  than  a  Jewish  fable,  told  by  nobody 
knows  whom,  and  nobody  knows  when. 

It  is  a  relief  to  the  genuine  and  sensible  soul  of  man  to 
find  the  story  unfounded.  It  frees  us  from  two  painful 
sensations  at  once,  —  that  of  having  hard  thoughts  of  the 
Creator  on  account  of  the  severity  of  the  sentence,  and 
that  of  sympathising  in  the  horrid  tragedy  of  a  drowning 
world.  He  who  cannot  feel  the  force  of  what  I  mean  is 
not,  in  my  estimation  of  character,  worthy  the  name  of 
a  human  being. 

I  have  just  said  there  is  great  cause  to  doubt  if  the  law 
called  the  law  of  Moses  was  given  by  Moses.     The  books. 


AGE  OK   REASON.  28l 

called  the  books  of  Moses,  which  contain,  among  other 
things,  what  is  called  the  Mosaic  law,  are  put  in  front  of 
the  Bible,  in  the  manner  of  a  constitution,  with  a  history 
annexed  to  it.  Had  these  books  been  written  by  Moses, 
they  would  undoubtedly  have  been  the  oldest  books  in 
the  Bible,  and  entitled  to  be  placed  first,  and  the  law 
and  the  history  they  contain  would  be  frequently  referred 
to  in  the  books  that  follow ;  but  this  is  not  the  case. 
From  the  time  of  Othniel,  the  first  of  the  judges  (Judges, 
chap,  iii.,  ver.  9,)  to  the  end  of  the  book  of  Judges, 
vvhich  contains  a  period  of  four  hundred  and  ten  years, 
this  law  and  those  books  were  not  in  practice,  nor 
known  among  the  Jews,  nor  are  they  so  much  as  alluded 
to  throughout  the  whole  of  that  period.  And  if  the 
reader  will  examine  the  22nd  and  23rd  chapters  of  the 
2nd  book  of  Kings,  and  34th  chapter  of  2nd  Chron.,  he 
will  find,  that  no  such  law  nor  any  such  books  were 
known  in  the  time  of  the  Jewish  monarchy,  and  that  the 
Jews  were  Pagans  during  the  whole  of  that  time,  and  of 
their  judges. 

The  first  time  the  law,  called  the  law  of  Moses,  made 
its  appearance,  was  in  the  time  of  Josiah,  about  a  thousand 
years  after  Moses  was  dead.  It  is  then  said  to  have  been 
found  by  accident.  The  account  of  this  finding  or  pre- 
tended finding  is  given,  2nd  Chron.,  chap,  xxxiv.,  ver. 
14,  15,  16,  18:  "  Hilkiah  the  priest /ound  the  book  of 
the  law  of  the  Lord,  given  by  Moses,  and  Hilkiah 
answered  and  said  to  Shaphan  the  scribe,  1  have  found 
the  book  of  the  law  in  the  house  of  the  Lord,  and 
Hilkiah  deliv^ered  the  book  to  Shaphan,  and  Shaphan 
carried  the  book  to  the  king,  and  Shaphan  told  the  king 
[Josiah]  saying,  Hilkiah  the  priest  hath  given  me  a 
book." 

In  consequence  of  this  finding,  which  much  resembles 
that  of  poor  Chatteron  finding  manuscript  poems  of 
Rowley,  the  Monk,  in  the  Cathedral  church  at  Bristol,  or 


282  AGE  OF  REASON. 

the  late  finding  of  manuscripts  of  Shakspeare  in  an  old 
chest,  (two  well-known  frauds,)  Josiah  abolished  the 
Pagan  religion  of  the  Jews,  massacred  all  the  Pagan 
priests,  though  he  himself  had  been  a  Pagan,  as  the 
reader  will  see  in  the  23rd  chap,  of  2nd  Kings,  and  thus 
established  in  blood  the  law  that  is  there  called  the  law 
of  Moses,  and  instituted  a  passover  in  commemoration 
thereof.  The  22nd  verse,  speaking  of  this  passover, 
says,  ' '  Surely  there  was  not  holden  such  a  passover  from 
the  days  of  the  judges  that  judged  Israel,  nor  in  all  the 
days  of  the  kings  of  Israel,  nor  of  the  kings  of  Judah ;" 
and  in  the  25th  verse,  speaking  of  this  priest-killing, 
Josiah  says,  ''''Like  unto  him  was  there  no  king  before 
him^  that  turned  to  the  Lord  with  all  his  heart,  and  with 
all  his  soul,  and  with  all  his  might,  according  to  all  the 
law  of  Moses ;  neither  after  him  arose  there  any  like 
him.''''  This  verse,  like  the  former  one,  is  a  general 
declaration  against  all  the  preceding  kings  without 
exception.  It  is  also  a  declaration  against  all  that 
reigned  after  him,  of  which  there  were  four,  the  whole 
time  of  whose  reigning  makes  but  twenty-two  years  and 
six  months,  before  the  Jews  were  entirely  broken  up  as  a 
nation  and  their  monarchy  destroyed.  It  is  therefore 
evident  that  the  law,  called  the  law  of  Moses,  of  which 
the  Jews  talk  so  much,  was  promulgated  and  established 
only  in  the  latter  time  of  the  Jewish  monarchy  ;  and  it  is 
very  remarkable,  that  no  sooner  had  they  established  it 
than  they  were  a  destroyed  people,  as  if  they  were 
punished  for  acting  an  imposition  and  affixing  the  name 
of  the  I<ord  to  it,  and  massacreing  their  former  priests 
under  the  pretence  of  religion.  The  sum  of  the  history 
of  the  Jews  is  this  :  they  continued  to  be  a  nation  about 
a  thousand  years ;  they  then  established  a  law,  which 
they  called  the  law  of  the  Lord  given  by  Moses^  and  were 
destroyed.  This  is  not  opinion,  but  historical  evidence. 
lyevi  the  Jew,  who  has  written  an  answer  to  the  Ao-^ 


AGB  OF   RKASON.  283 

of  Reason^  gives  a  strange  account  of  the  law  called  the 
law  of  Moses. 

In  speaking  of  the  story  of  the  sun  and  moon  standing 
still,  that  the  Israelites  might  cut  the  throats  of  all  their 
enemies  and  hang  all  their  kings,  as  told  in  Joshua, 
chap.  X. ,  he  says,  ' '  There  is  also  another  proof  of  the 
reality  of  this  miracle,  which  is,  the  appeal  that  the 
author  of  the  book  of  Joshua  makes  to  the  book  of 
Jasher, — '/y  this  not  written  in  the  book  of  Jasherf 
Hence,"  continues  Levi,  "it  is  manifest  that  the  book, 
commonly  called  the  book  of  Jasher,  existed  and  was  well 
known  at  the  time  the  book  of  Joshua  was  written ;  and 
pray,  Sir,"  continues  Levi,  "what  book  do  you  think 
this  was?  why^  no  other  than  the  lazu  of  Moses!''''  Levi, 
like  the  Bishop  of  Llandaff,  and  many  other  guess-work 
commentators,  either  forgets  or  does  not  know  what  is 
in  one  part  of  the  Bible  when  he  is  giving  his  opinion 
upon  another  part. 

I  did  not,  however,  expect  to  find  so  much  ignorance 
in  a  Jew  with  respect  to  the  history  of  his  nation,  though 
I  might  not  be  surprised  at  it  in  a  bishop.  If  Levi  will 
look  into  the  account  given  in  the  first  chap.,  2nd  book 
of  Sam.,  of  the  Amalekite  slaying  Saul,  and  bringing 
the  crown  and  bracelets  to  David,  he  will  find  the 
following  recital,  ver.  15,  17,  18:  "And  David  called 
one  of  the  young  men,  and  said,  go  near  and  fall  upon 
him  [the  Amalekite,]  and  he  smote  him  that  he  died : 
and  David  lamented  with  this  lamention  over  Saul  and 
over  Jonathan  his  son ;  also  he  bade  them  teach  the 
children  of  Judah  the  use  of  the  bow; — behold  it  is 
written  in  the  book  of  fasher^  If  the  book  of  Jasher 
were  what  Levi  calls  it,  the  law  of  Moses,  written  by 
Moses,  it  is  not  possible  that  any  thing  that  David  said 
or  did  could  be  written  in  that  law,  since  Moses  died 
more  than  five  hundred  years  before  David  was  born  : 
and,  on  the  other  hand,  admitting  the  book  of  Jasher  to 


284  AGE   OF   REASON. 

be  the  law  called  the  law  of  Moses,  that  law  must  have 
been  written  more  than  five  hundred  years  after  Moses 
was  dead,  or  it  could  not  relate  any  thing  said  or  done  by 
David.  Levi  may  take  which  of  these  cases  he  pleases, 
for  both  are  against  him. 

I  am  not  going  in  the  course  of  this  letter  to  write  a 
commentary  on  the  Bible.      The  two  instances  I  have 
produced,  and  which  are  taken  from  the  beginning  of 
the  Bible,  show  the  necessity  of  examining  it.     It  is  a 
book  that  has  been  read  more,  and  examined  less,  than 
any  book  that  ever   existed.      Had  it  cOme  to  us  an 
Arabic  or  Chinese  book,  and  said  to  have  been  a  sacred 
book  by  the  people  from  whom  it  came,   no  apology 
would  have  been  made  for  the  confused  and  disorderly 
state  it  is  in.     The  tales  it  relates  of  the  Creator  would 
have  been  censured,  and  our  pity  excited  for  those  who 
believed  them.     We  should  have  vindicated  the  goodness 
of  God  against  such  a  book,  and  preached  up  the  disbelief 
of  it  out  of  reverence  to  him.     Why  then  do  we  not  act  as 
honorably  by  the  Creator  in  the  one  case  as  we  would  do 
in   the   other?      As   a   Chinese    book   we   would   have 
examined  it; — ought  we  not   then  to  examine  it  as  a 
Jewish  book?     The  Chinese  are  a  people  who  have  all 
the  appearance  of  far  greater  antiquity  than  the  Jews,  and 
in  point  of  permanency  there  is  no  comparison.     They 
are  also  a  people  of  mild  manners  and   good   morals, 
except  where  they  have  been  corrupted  by  European 
commerce.     Yet  we  take  the  word  of  a  restless,  bloody- 
minded  people,  as  the  Jews  of  Palestine  were,  when  we 
would  reject  the  same  authority  from  a  better  people. 
We  ought  to  see  it  is  habit  and  prejudice  that  have  pre- 
vented people  from  examining  the  Bible,     Those  of  the 
church  of  England  call  it  holy,  because  the  Jews  called  it 
so,  and  because  custom  and  certain  acts  of  parliament 
call  it  so ;  and  they  read  it  from  custom.     Dissenters 
read  it  for  the  purpose  of  doctrinal  controversy,  and  are 


AGE   OF   REASON.  285 

very  fertile  in  discoveries  and  inventions.     Bnt  none  of 
them  read  it  for  the  pnre  pnrpose  of  information,  and  of 
rendering  justice  to  the  Creator,   by  examining  if  the 
evidence  it  contains  warrants  the  belief  of  its  being  what 
it  is  called.     Instead  of  doing  this,  they  take  it  blind- 
folded, and  will  have  it  to  be  the  word  of  God,  whether 
it  be  so  or  not.     For  my  own  part,  my  belief  in  the  per- 
fection of  the  Deity  will  not  permit  me  to  believe  that  a 
bock  so  manifestly  obscure,  disorderly,  and  contradictory', 
can  be  his  work.       I  can   write  a  better  book   myself. 
This  disbelief  in  me   proceeds  from   my   belief  in    the 
Creator.     I  cannot  pin  my  faith   upon  the  say  so  of 
Hilkiah  the  priest,  who  said  he  found  it,  or  any  part  of 
it ;  nor  upon  Shaphan  the  scribe  ;  nor  upon  any  priest, 
nor  any  scribe  or  man  of  the  law  of  the  present  day. 

As  to  acts  of  parliament,  there  are  some  that  say  there 
are  witches  and  wizards ;  and  the  persons  who  made 
those  acts  (it  was  in  the  time  of  James  the  First),  made 
also  some  acts  which  call  the  Bible  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
or  Word  of  God.  But  acts  of  parliament  decide  nothing 
with  respect  to  God ;  and  as  these  acts  of  parliament- 
makers  were  wrong  with  respect  to  witches  and  wizards, 
they  may  also  be  wrong  with  respect  to  the  book  in 
question.  It  is  therefore  necessary  that  the  book  be 
examined  ;  it  is  our  duty  to  examine  it ;  and  to  suppress 
the  right  of  examination  is  sinful  in  any  government,  or 
in  any  judge  or  jury.  The  Bible  makes  God  to  say  to 
Moses,  Dent.,  chap,  vii.,  ver.  2,  "And  when  the  Lord  thy 
God  shall  deliver  them  before  thee,  thou  shalt  smite 
them,  and  utterly  destroy  them ;  thou  shalt  make  no 
covenant  with  them,  nor  show  mercy  unto  them.^''  Not 
all  the  priests,  nor  scribes,  nor  tribunals  in  the  world, 
nor  all  the  authority  of  man,  shall  make  me  believe  that 
God  ever  gave  such  a  Robesperian  precept  as  that  of 
showing  no  mercy ;  and  consequently  it  is  impossible 
that  I,  or  any  person  who  believes  as  reverentially  of  the 


286  AGE   OF   REASON. 

Creator  as  I  do,  can  believe  such  a  book  to  be  the  word 
of  God. 

There  have  been  and  still  are  those  who,  whilst  they 
profess  to  believe  the  Bible  to  be  the  word  of  God,  aflfect 
to  turn  it  into  ridicule.  Taking  their  profession  and 
conduct  together,  they  act  blasphemously  ;  because  they 
act  as  if  God  himself  v^zs  not  to  be  believed.  The  case 
is  exceedingly  different  with  respect  to  the  Age  of 
Reason.  That  book  is  written  to  show  from  the  Bible 
itself,  that  there  is  abundant  matter  to  suspect  it  is  not 
the  word  of  God,  and  that  we  have  been  imposed  upon, 
first  by  Jews,  and  afterwards  by  priests  and  commen- 
tators. 

Not  one  of  those  who  have  attempted  to  write  answers 
to  the  Age  of  Reason^  have  taken  the  ground  upon  which 
only  an  answer  could  be  written.  The  case  in  question 
is  not  upon  any  point  of  doctrine,  but  altogether  upon  a 
matter  of  fact.  Is  the  book  called  the  Bible  the  word  of 
God,  or  is  it  not?  If  it  can  be  proved  to  be  so,  it  ought 
to  be  believed  as  such  ;  if  not,  it  ought  not  to  be 
believed  as  such.  This  is  the  true  state  of  the  case. 
The  Age  of  Reason  produces  evidence  to  show,  and  I 
have  in  this  letter  produced  additional  evidence,  that  it 
is  not  the  word  of  God.  Those  who  take  the  contrary 
side,  should  prove  that  it  is.  But  this  they  have  not 
done,  nor  attempted  to  do,  and  consequently  they  have 
done  nothing  to  the  purpose. 

The  prosecutors  of  Williams  have  shrunk  from  the 
point,  as  the  answerers  have  done.  They  have  availed 
themselves  of  prejudice  instead  of  proof.  If  a  writing 
was  produced  in  a  court  of  judicature,  said  to  be  the 
writing  of  a  certain  person,  and  upon  the  reality  or  non- 
reality  of  which  some  matter  at  issue  depended,  the  point 
to  be  proved  would  be,  that  such  writing  was  the  writing 
of  such  person.  Or  if  the  issue  depended  upon  certain 
words,   which   some   certain   person  was  said   to   have 


AGH   (>F    REASON.  287 

spoken,  tlie  point  to  be  proved  would  be,  that  such  words 
were  spoken  by  such  person;  and  Mr.  Erskine  would 
contend  the  case  upon  this  ground.  A  certain  book  is 
said  to  be  the  word  of  God.  What  is  the  proof  that  it  is 
so?  for  upon  this  the  whole  depends  ;  and  if  it  cannot  be 
proved  to  be  so,  the  prosecution  fails  for  want  of 
evidence. 

The  prosecution  against  Williams  charges  him  with 
publishing  a  book,  entitled  the  Age  of  Reason^  which, 
it  says,  is  an  impious,  blasphemous  pamphlet,  tending  to 
ridicule  and  bring  into  contempt  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
Nothing  is  more  easy  than  to  find  abusive  words,  and 
English  prosecutions  are  famous  for  this  sp>ecies  of 
vulgarity.  The  charge,  however,  is  sophistical ;  for  the 
charge,  as  growing  out  of  the  pamphlet,  should  have 
stated,  not  as  it  now  states,  to  ridicule  and  bring  into 
contempt  the  Holy  Scriptures,  but  to  show  that  the 
books  called  the  Holy  Scriptures  are  not  the  Holy 
Scriptures.  It  is  one  thing  if  I  ridicule  a  work  as  being 
written  by  a  certain  person ;  but  it  is  quite  a  different 
thing  if  I  write  to  prove  that  such  work  was  not  written 
by  such  person.  In  the  first  case  I  attack  the  person 
through  the  work  ;  in  the  other  case  I  defend  the  honor 
of  the  person  against  the  work.  This  is  what  the  Age 
of  Reason  does,  and  consequently  the  charge  in  the 
indictment  is  sophistically  stated.  Every  one  will  admit, 
that  if  the  Bible  be  not  the  word  of  God,  we  err  in 
believing  it  to  be  his  word,  and  ought  not  to  believe  it. 
Certainly,  then,  the  ground  the  prosecution  should  take, 
would  be  to  prove  that  the  Bible  is  in  fact  what  it  is 
called.  But  this  the  prosecution  has  not  done,  and 
cannot  do. 

In  all  cases  the  prior  fact  must  be  proved,  before  the 
subsequent  facts  can  be  admitted  in  evidence.  In  a  pros- 
ecution for  adultery,  the  fact  of  marriage,  which  is  the 
prior  fact,  must  be  proved,   before  the  facts  to  prove 


288  AGE   OF   REASON 

adultery  can  be  received.  If  the  fact  of  marriage  cannot 
be  proved,  adultery  cannot  be  proved  ;  and  if  the  prose- 
cution cannot  prove  the  Bible  to  be  the  word  of  God,  the 
charge  of  blasphemy  is  visionary  and  groundless. 

In  Turkey  they  might  prove,  if  the  case  happened, 
that  a  certain  book  was  bought  of  a  certain  bookseller, 
and  that  the  said  book  was  written  against  the  Koran. 
In  Spain  and  Portugal  they  might  prove,  that  a  certain 
book  was  bought  of  a  certain  bookseller,  and  that  the 
said  book  was  written  against  the  infallibility  of  the 
Pope.  Under  the  ancient  mythology  they  might  have 
proved,  that  a  certain  writing  was  bought  of  a  certain 
person,  and  that  the  said  writing  was  written  against  the 
belief  of  a  plurality  of  gods,  and  in  the  support  of  the 
belief  of  one  God.  Socrates  was  condemned  for  a  work 
of  this  kind. 

All  these  are  but  subsequent  facts,  and  amount  to 
nothing,  unless  the  prior  facts  be  proved.  The  prior 
fact,  with  respect  to  the  first  case  is.  Is  the  Koran  the 
word  of  God?  with  respect  to  the  second.  Is  the  infalli- 
bility of  the  Pope  a  truth?  with  respect  to  the  third, 
Is  the  belief  of  a  plurality  of  gods  a  true  belief?  and  in 
like  manner  with  respect  to  the  present  prosecution.  Is 
the  book  called  the  Bible  the  word  of  God?  If  the  present 
prosecution  prove  no  more  than  could  be  proved  in 
any  or  all  of  these  cases,  it  proves  only  as  they  do,  or  as 
an  inquisition  would  prove  ;  and,  in  this  view  of  the  case, 
the  prosecutors  ought  at  least  to  leave  oflf  reviling  that 
infernal  institution,  the  inquisition.  The  prosecution, 
Iiowever,  though  it  may  injure  the  individual,  may 
promote  the  cause  of  truth  ;  because  the  manner  in  which 
it  has  been  conducted  appears  a  confession  to  the  world, 
that  there  is  no  evidence  to  prove  that  the  Bible  is  the 
word  of  God.  On  what  authority  then  do  we  believe  the 
many  strange  stories  that  the  Bible  tells  of  God? 

This  prosecution  has   been   carried   on   through   the 


AGE  OF   REASON.  289 

inediuiii  of  what  is  called  a  special  jur>-,  and  the  whole 
of  a  special  jury  is  iiomiuated  by  the  master  of  the  crown 
office.  Mr.  Erskiue  vaunts  himself  upon  the  bill  he 
brought  iuto  parliament  with  respect  to  trials  for  what 
the  goveninient-party  calls  libels.  But  if  in  crown  pro- 
secutions the  master  of  the  crown  office  is  to  continue  to 
appoint  the  whole  special  jury,  which  he  does  by  nom- 
inating the  forty-eight  persons  from  which  the  solicitor 
of  each  party  is  to  strike  out  twelve,  Mr.  Erskine's  bill 
is  only  vapor  and  smoke.  The  root  of  the  grievance  lies 
in  the  manner  of  forming  the  jury,  and  to  this  Mr. 
Erskine's  bill  applies  no  remedy. 

When  the  trial  of  Williams  came  on,  only  eleven  of 
the  special  jurymen  appeared,  and  the  trial  was  adjourned. 
In  cases  where  the  whole  number  do  not  appear,  it  is 
customary  to  make  up  the  deficiency  by  taking  jurymen 
from  persons  present  in  court.  This,  in  the  law  term, 
is  called  a  tales.  Why  was  not  this  done  in  this  case? 
Reason  will  suggest,  that  they  did  not  choose  to  depend 
on  a  man  accidentally  taken.  When  the  trial  re-com- 
menced, the  whole  of  the  special  jury  appeared,  and 
Williams  was  convicted ;  it  is  folly  to  contend  a  cause 
where  the  whole  jury  is  nominated  by  one  of  the  parties. 
I  will  relate  a  recent  case  that  explains  a  great  deal  with 
respect  to  special  juries  in  crown  prosecutions. 

On  the  trial  of  Lambert  and  others,  printers  and  pro- 
prietors of  the  Morning  Chronicle^  for  a  libel,  a  special 
jury  was  struck,  on  the  prayer  of  the  attorney-general, 
who  used  to  be  called,  Diabolus  Regis,  or  King's  Devil. 

Only  seven  or  eight  of  the  special  jury  appeared,  and 
the  attome>-general  not  praying  a  tales,  the  trial  stood 
over  to  a  future  day  :  when  it  was  to  be  brought  on  a 
second  time,  the  attorney-general  prayed  for  a  new 
special  jury,  but  as  this  was  not  admissible,  the  original 
snecial  jury  was  summoned.  Only  eight  of  them  ap- 
-oeared,  on  which  the  attorney-general  said,  "  As  I  cannot 


290  AGE   OF   REASON. 

on  a  second  trial  have  a  special  jury,  I  will  pray  a  tales.'''' 
Four  persons  were  then  taken  from  the  persons  present 
in  court,  and  added  to  the  eight  special  jurymen.  The 
jury  went  out  at  two  o'clock  to  consult  on  their  verdict, 
and  the  judge  (Kenyon)  understanding  they  were  divided 
and  likely  to  be  some  time  in  making  up  their  minds, 
retired  from  the  bench  and  went  home.  At  seven  the 
jury  went,  attended  by  an  officer  of  the  court,  to  the 
judge's  house  and  delivered  a  verdict  :  ^''  Guilty  of  pub- 
lishing.^ but  with  no  malicious  intention.''''  The  judge 
said,  "/  cannot  record  this  verdict;  it  is  no  verdict  af 
all.'*''  The  jury  withdrew,  and,  after  sitting  in  consulta- 
tion till  five  in  the  morning,  brought  in  a  verdict  not 
GUILTY.  Would  this  have  been  the  case,  had  they  been 
all  special  jurymen  nominated  by  the  master  of  the 
crown-office?  This  is  one  of  the  cases  that  ought  to 
open  the  eyes  of  the  people  with  respect  to  the  manner 
of  forming  special  juries. 

On  the  trial  of  Williams,  the  judge  prevented  the 
counsel  for  the  defendant  proceeding  in  the  defence. 
The  prosecution  had  selected  a  number  of  passages  from 
the  Age  0/ Reason^  and  inserted  them  in  the  indictment. 
The  defending  counsel  was  selecting  other  passages  ta 
show  that  the  passages  in  the  indictment  were  conclusions- 
drawn  from  premises,  and  unfairly  separated  therefrom 
in  the  indictment.  The  judge  said,  he  did  not  know  how- 
to  act;  meaning,  thereby,  whether  to  let  the  counsel 
proceed  in  the  defence  or  not,  and  asked  the  jury  if  they 
wished  to  hear  the  passages  read  which  the  defending 
counsel  had  selected.  The  jury  said  NO,  and  the  defend- 
ing counsel  was  in  consequence  silent.  Mr.  Erskine 
then,  Falstaff-like,  having  all  the  field  to  himself,  and 
no  enemy  at  hand,  laid  about  him  most  heroically,  and 
the  jury  found  the  defendant  guilty.  I  know  not  if  Mr. 
Erskine  ran  out  of  court  and  hallooed.  Huzza  for  the 
Bible  and  the  trial  by  jnr)-  ! 


AGE  OF  REASON.  29I 

Robespierre  caused  a  decree  to  be  passed  during  the 
trial  of  Brissot  and  others,  that  after  a  trial  had  lasted 
three  days,  (the  whole  of  which  time,  in  the  case  of 
Brissot,  was  taken  up  by  the  prosecuting  party)  the  judge 
should  ask  the  jury  (who  were  then  a  packed  jury)  if  they 
were  satisfied.  If  the  jury  said,  YES,  the  trial  ended, 
and  the  jury  proceeded  to  give  their  verdict,  without 
hearing  the  defence  of  the  accused  party.  It  needs  no 
depth  of  wisdom  to  make  an  application  of  this  case. 

I  will  now  state  a  case  to  show  that  the  trial  of  Williams 
is  not  a  trial,  according  to  Kenyon's  own  explanation  of 
law. 

On  a  late  trial  in  London  (Selthens  versus  Hoossman) 
on  a  policy  of  insurance,  one  of  the  jurymen,  Mr. 
Dunnage,  after  hearing  one  side  of  the  case,  and  without 
hearing  the  other  side,  got  up  and  said,  it  was  as  legal 
XI policy  of  insurance  as  ever  was  written.  The  judge, 
who  was  the  same  as  presided  at  the  trial  of  Williams, 
replied,  that  it  was  a  great  misfortune  when  any  gentle- 
man of  the  jury  makes  up  his  mind  on  a  cause  before  it 
was  finished.  Mr.  Erskine,  who  in  that  cause  was 
coimsel  for  the  defendant  (in  this  he  was  against  the 
defendant),  cried  out,  //  is  worse  than  a  misfortune — it 
is  a  fault.  The  judge,  in  his  address  to  the  jury,  in 
summing  up  the  evidence,  expatiated  upon  and  explained 
the  parts  which  the  law  assigned  to  the  counsel  on  each 
side,  to  the  witnesses,  and  to  the  judge,  and  said,  "'IVhen 
all  this  was  done^  and  not  until  then,  it  ivas  the 
business  of  the  jury  to  declare  what  the  jtistice  of  the  case 
was;  and  that  it  was  extremely  rash  and  imprudent  in 
any  man  to  draw  a  conclusion  before  all  the  premises 
were  laid  before  them,  upon  which  that  conclusion  was  to  be 
grounded.''''  According  then  to  Kenyon's  own  doctrine, 
the  trial  of  Williams  is  an  irregular  trial,  the  verdict  an 
irregular  verdict,  and  as  such  is  not  recordable. 

As  to  special  juries,  they  are  but  modem,  and  were 


292  AGE   OF   REASON. 

instituted  for  the  purpose  of  determining  cases  at  laiv 
between  merchants ;  because,  as  the  method  of  keeping- 
merchants'  accounts  differs  from  that  of  common  trades- 
men, and  their  business,  by  lying  much  in  foreign  bills 
of  exchange,  insurance,  &c. ,  is  of  a  different  description 
to  that  of  common  tradesmen,  it  might  happen  that  a 
common  jury  might  not  be  competent  to  form  a  judg- 
ment. The  law  that  instituted  special  juries  makes  it 
necessary  that  the  jurors  be  merchants^  or  of  the  degree 
of  squires.  A  special  jury  in  London  is  generally  com- 
posed of  merchants  ;  and  in  the  country  of  men  called 
country  squires,  that  is,  fox-hunters,  or  men  qualified  to 
hunt  foxes.  The  one  may  decide  very  well  upon  a  case 
of  pounds,  shillings,  and  pence,  or  of  the  counting-house  ; 
and  the  other,  of  the  jockey-club  or  the  chase.  But  who 
would  not  laugh,  that  because  such  men  can  decide  such 
cases,  they  can  also  be  jurors  upon  theology?  Talk  with 
some  London  merchants  about  scripture,  and  they  will 
understand  you  mean  scrip^  and  tell  you  how  much  it  is 
worth  at  the  Stock  Exchange.  Ask  them  about  theology, 
and  they  will  say  they  know  of  no  such  gentleman  upon 
'Change.  Tell  some  country  squires  of  the  sun  and 
moon  standing  still,  the  one  on  the  top  of  a  hill  and  the 
other  in  a  valley,  and  they  will  swear  it  is  a  lie  of  one's 
own  making.  Tell  them  that  God  Almighty  ordered  a 
man  to  make  a  cake  and  bake  it  with  *  *  *  and  eat  it, 
and  they  will  say  it  is  one  of  Dean  Swift's  blackguard 
stories.  Tell  them  it  is  in  the  Bible,  and  they  will  lay 
a  bowl  of  punch  it  is  not,  and  leave  it  to  the  parson  of 
the  parish  to  decide.  Ask  them  also  about  theolog>',  and 
they  will  say  they  know  not  of  such  a  one  on  the  turf.  An 
appeal  to  such  juries  serves  to  bring  the  Bible  into  more 
ridicule  than  any  thing  the  author  of  the  Age  of  Reason 
has  written ;  and  the  manner  in  which  the  trial  has  been 
conducted,  shows  that  the  prosecutor  dares  not  come  ta 
the  point,  nor  meet  the  defence  of  the  defendant.      But> 


AGK   OF   REASON.  293 

all  Other  cases  apart,  on  what  ground  of  right,  otherwise 
than  on  the  right  assumed  by  an  inquisition,  do  such 
prosecutions  stand?  Religion  is  a  private  affair  between 
ever>'  man  and  his  Maker,  and  no  tribunal  or  third  party 
has  a  right  to  interfere  between  them.  It  is  not  properly 
a  thing  of  this  world  —  it  is  only  practised  in  this  world  ; 
but  its  object  is  in  a  future  world  :  and  it  is  not  otherwise 
an  object  of  just  laws,  than  for  the  purpose  of  protecting 
the  equal  rights  of  all,  however  various  their  beliefs  may 
be.  If  one  man  choose  to  believe  the  book  called  the  Bible 
to  be  the  word  of  God,  and  another,  from  the  convinced 
idea  of  the  purity  and  perfection  of  God,  compared  with 
the  contradictions  the  book  contains — from  the  las- 
civiousness  of  some  of  its  stories,  like  that  of  Lot  getting 
drunk  and  debauching  his  two  daughters,  which  is  not 
spoken  of  as  a  crime,  and  for  which  the  most  absurd 
apologies  are  made — from  the  immorality  of  some  of  its 
precepts,  like  that  of  showing  no  mercy — and  from  the 
total  want  of  evidence  on  the  case,  thinks  he  ought 
not  to  believe  it  to  be  the  word  of  God,  each  of  them  has 
an  equal  right ;  and  if  the  one  has  a  right  to  give  his 
reasons  for  believing  it  to  be  so,  the  other  has  an  equal 
right  to  give  his  reasons  for  believing  the  contrary. 
Any  thing  that  goes  beyond  this  rule  is  an  inquisition. 
Mr.  Erskine  talks  of  his  moral  education  :  Mr.  Erskine 
is  very  little  acquainted  with  theological  subjects,  if  he 
does  not  know  there  is  such  a  thing  as  a  sincere  and 
religious  belief  that  the  Bible  is  not  the  word  of  God. 
This  is  my  belief;  it  is  the  belief  of  thousands  far  more 
learned  than  Mr.  Erskine  ;  and  it  is  a  belief  that  is  every 
day  increasing.  It  is  not  infidelity,  as  Mr.  Erskine 
profanely  and  abusively  calls  it :  it  is  the  direct  reverse 
of  infidelity.  It  is  a  pure  religious  belief,  founded  on  the 
idea  of  the  perfection  of  the  Creator.  If  the  Bible  be  the 
word  of  God,  it  needs  not  the  wretched  aid  of  prosecu- 
tions  to   support   it  ;     and   you    might   with    as   much 


294  A.GE  OF   REASON. 

propriety  make  a  law  to  protect  the  sunshine,  as  to 
protect  the  Bible,  if  the  Bible,  like  the  sun,  be  the  work 
of  God.  We  see  that  God  takes  good  care  of  the  Crea- 
tion he  has  made.  He  suffers  no  part  of  it  to  be  extin- 
guished ;  and  he  will  take  the  same  care  of  his  word,  if 
he  ever  gave  one.  But  men  ought  to  be  reverentially 
careful  and  suspicious  how  they  ascribe  books  to  him  as 
his  word  which,  from  this  confused  condition,  would 
dishonor  a  common  scribbler,  and  against  which  there 
is  abundant  evidence,  and  every  cause  to  'suspect  imposi- 
tion. Leave  then  the  Bible  to  itself  God  will  take 
care  of  it,  if  he  has  any  thing  to  do  with  it,  as  he  takes 
care  of  the  sun  and  the  moon,  which  need  not  3^our  laws 
for  their  better  protection.  As  the  two  instances  I  have 
produced,  in  the  beginning  of  this  letter,  from  the  book 
of  Genesis,  the  one  respecting  the  account  called  the 
Mosaic  account  of  the  Creation,  the  other  of  the  Flood, 
sufficiently  show  the  necessity  of  examining  the  Bible, 
in  order  to  ascertain  what  degree  of  evidence  there  is  for 
receiving  or  rejecting  it  as  a  sacred  book,  I  shall  not  add 
more  upon  that  subject;  but  in  order  to  show  Mr. 
Erskine  that  there  are  religious  establishments  for  public 
worship  which  make  no  profession  of  faith  of  the  books 
called  Holy  Scriptures,  nor  admit  of  priests,  I  will  con- 
clude with  an  account  of  a  society  lately  began  in  Paris, 
and  which  is  very  rapidly  extending  itself 

The  society  takes  the  name  of  Theophilanthropes, 
which  would  be  rendered  in  English  by  the  word  Theo- 
philanthropists,  a  word  compounded  of  three  Greek 
words,  signifying  God,  lyove,  and  Man.  The  explana- 
tion given  to  this  word  is.  Lovers  of  God  and  Man^  or 
Adorers  of  God  and  Friends  of  Man — Adorateurs  de 
Dieu  et  amis  des  Hommes.  The  society  proposes  to 
publish  each  year  a  volume  entitled,  Annee  Religeuse 
des  Theophilanthropes — Year  religious  of  the  Theophi- 
lanthropists.    The  first  volume  is  just  published,  entitled  : 


age  of  reason.  295 

Religious  Year  of  the  Theophilanthropists, 
or,  adorers  of  god  and  friends  of  man. 

Being  a  collection  of  the  discourses,  lectures,  hymns, 
and  canticles,  for  all  the  religious  and  moral  festivals  of 
the  Theophilanthropists  during  the  course  of  the  year, 
whether  in  their  public  temples  or  in  their  private 
families,  published  by  the  author  of  the  Manual  of 
the  Theophilanthropists. 

The  volume  of  this  year,  which  is  the  first,  contains 
214  pages  duodecimo. 

The  following  is  the  table  of  contents : 

1.  Precise  history  of  the  Theophilanthropists. 

2.  Exercises  common  to  all  the  festivals. 

3.  Hymn,  No.  I.     God  of  whom  the  universe  speaks. 

4.  Discourse  upon  the  existence  of  God. 

5.  Ode  II.     The  heavens  instruct  the  earth. 

6.  Precepts  of  wisdom,  extracted  from  the  book  of  the 
Adorateurs. 

7.  Canticle,  III.     God  Creator,  soul  of  nature. 

8.  Extracts  from  divers  moralists  upon  the  nature  of 
God,  and  upon  the  physical  proofs  of  his  existence. 

9.  Canticle,  No.  IV.     Let  us  bless  at  our  waking  the 
God  who  gives  us  light. 

10.  Moral  thoughts  extracted  from  the  Bible. 

11.  Hymn,  No.  V.     Father  of  the  universe. 

12.  Contemplation  of  nature  on  the  first  days  of  the 
spring. 

13.  Ode,  No.  VI.     Lord,  in  thy  glory  adorable. 

14.  Extracts  from  the  moral  thoughts  of  Confucius. 

15.  Canticle  in  praise  of  actions,  and  thanks  for  the 
works  of  the  creation. 

i6.  Continuation  from  the  moral  thoughts  of  Con- 
fucius. 

17.  Hymn,  No.  VII.  All  the  universe  is  full  of  thy 
magnificence. 


296  AGE   OF    REASON. 

18.  Extracts  from  an  ancient  sage  of  India  upon  the 
duties  of  families. 

19.  Upon  the  Spring. 

20.  Moral  thoughts  of  divers  Chinese  authors. 

21.  Canticle,  No.   VIII.     Every  thing  celebrates  the 
glory  of  the  eternal. 

22.  Continuation   of  the   moral  thoughts  of  Chinese 
authors. 

23.  Invocation  for  the  country. 

24.  Extracts  from  the  moral  thoughts  of  Theognis. 

25.  Invocation,  Creator  of  man. 

26.  Ode,  No.  IX.     Upon  death. 

27.  Extracts  from  the   book  of  the  Moral  Universal^ 
upon  happiness. 

28.  Ode,  No,  X.     Supreme  Author  of  Nature. 


INTRODUCTION, 

ENTITLED 
PRECISE   HISTORY  OF  THE    THEOPHILANTHROPISTS. 

"Towards  the  month  of  Vendimiaire  of  the  year  5, 
(Sep.  1796)  there  appeared  at  Paris  a  small  work,  entitled, 
Manuel  of  the  Theoantropophiles^  since  called,  for  sake 
of  easier  pronounciation,  Theophi  Ian  thro  pes  (Theophi- 
lanthropists)  published  by  C . 

"The  worship  set  forth  in  this  Manual^  of  which  the 
origin  is  from  the  beginning  of  the  world,  was  then 
professed  by  some  families  in  the  silence  of  domestic 
life.  But  scarcely  was  the  Manual  published,  than  some 
persons,  respectable  for  their  knowledge  and  their  man- 
ners, saw,  in  the  formation  of  a  society  open  to  the 
public,  an  easy  method  of  spreading  moral  religion,  and 
of  leading  by  degrees  great  numbers  to  the  knowledge 
thereof,  who  appear  to  have  forgotten  it.  This  considera- 
tion ought  of  itself  not  to  leave  indifferent  those  persons 


AGE  OF   REASON.  297 

who  know  that  morality  and  religion,  which  is  the  most 
solid  support  thereof,  are  necessarj-  to  the  maintenance  of 
society  as  well  as  to  the  happiness  of  the  individual. 
These  considerations  determined  the  families  of  the 
Theophilanthropists  to  unite  publicly  for  the  exercise  of 
their  worship. 

"The  first  society  of  this  kind  opened  in  the  month  of 
Nivose,  year  5,  (Jan.  1797)  in  the  street  Dennis,  No.  34, 
comer  of  Lombard-street.  The  care  of  conducting  this 
society  was  undertaken  by  five  fathers  of  families.  They 
adopted  the  Manual  of  the  Theophilanthropists.  They 
agreed  to  hold  their  days  of  public  worship  on  the  days 
corresponding  to  Sundays,  but  without  making  this  a 
hindrance  to  other  societies  to  choose  such  other  day  as 
they  thought  more  convenient.  Soon  after  this,  more 
societies  were  opened,  of  which  some  celebrate  on  the 
decadi  (tenth  day)  and  others  on  the  Sunday  :  it  was  also 
resolved,  that  the  committee  should  meet  one  hour  each 
week,  for  the  purpose  of  preparing  or  examining  the 
discourses  and  lectures  proposed  for  the  next  general 
assembly.  That  the  general  assemblies  should  be  called 
f^tes  (festivals)  religious  and  moral.  That  those  festivals 
should  be  conducted,  in  principle  and  form,  in  a  manner 
so  as  not  to  be  considered  as  the  festivals  of  an  exclusive 
worship ;  and  that,  in  recalling  those  who  might  not  be 
attached  to  any  particular  worship,  those  festivals  might 
also  be  attended  as  moral  exercises  by  disciples  of  every 
sect,  and  consequently  avoid,  by  scrupulous  care,  every 
thing  that  might  make  the  society  appear  under  the 
name  of  a  sect.  The  society  adopts  neither  rites  nor 
priesthood^  and  it  will  never  lose  sight  of  the  resolution 
not  to  advance  any  thing,  as  a  society,  inconvenient  to 
any  sect  or  sects,  in  any  time  or  country,  and  under  any 
government. 

"It  will  be  seen,  that  it  is  so  much  the  more  easy  for 
the  society  to  keep  within  this  circle,  because,  that  the 


298  AGE   OF   RKASON. 

dogmas  of  the  Theophilanthropists  are  those  upon  which 
all  the  sects  have  agreed,  that  their  moral  is  that  upon 
which  there  has  never  been  the  least  dissent,  and  that 
the  name  they  have  taken  expresses  the  double  end  of 
all  the  sects,  that  of  leading  to  the  adoration  of  God^  and 
love  of  man. 

"The  Theophilanthropists  do  not  call  themselves  the 
disciples  of  such  or  such  a  man.  They  avail  themselves 
of  the  wise  precepts  that  have  been  transmitted  by 
writers  of  all  countries  and  in  all  ages.  The  reader  will 
find  in  the  discourses,  lectures,  hymns,  and  canticles, 
which  the  Theophilanthropists  have  adopted  for  their 
religious  and  moral  festivals,  and  which  they  present 
under  the  title  of  Annee  Religieuse^  extracts  from 
moralists,  ancient  and  modern,  divested  of  maxims  too 
severe,  or  too  loosely  conceived,  or  contrary  to  piety, 
whether  towards  God  or  towards  man. ' ' 


Next  follow  the  dogmas  of  the  Theophilanthropists, 
or  things  they  profess  to  believe.  These  are  but  two, 
and  are  thus  expressed  :  Les  Theophilantropes  croient  a 
P  existence  de  Dieu^  et  a  P  immortalite  de  P  ante. — The 
Theophilanthropists  believe  in  the  existence  of  God,  and 
the  immortality  of  the  soul. 

The  Manual  of  the  Theophilanthropists^  a  small  volume 
of  sixty  pages  duodecimo,  is  published  separately,  as  is 
also  their  Catechism^  which  is  of  the  same  size.  The 
principles  of  the  Theophilanthropists  are  the  same  as 
those  published  in  the  first  part  of  the  Age  of  Reason  in 
1793,  and  in  the  second  part  in  1795.  The  Theophilan- 
thropists, as  a  society,  are  silent  upon  all  the  things  they 
do  not  profess  to  believe,  as  the  sacredness  of  the  books 
called  the  Bible,  &c. ,  &c.  They  profess  the  immortality 
of  the  soul,  but  they  are  silent  on  the  immortality  of  the 
body,  or  that  which  the  church  calls  the  resurrection. 


AGE  OF   REASON.  299 

The  author  of  the  Age  of  Reason  gives  reasons  for  every 
thing  he  disbelieves^  as  well  as  for  those  he  believes  ;  and 
where  this  cannot  be  done  with  safety,  the  government 
is  a  despotism,  and  the  church  an  inquisition. 

It  is  more  than  three  years  since  the  first  part  of  the 
Age  0/ Reason  was  published,  and  more  than  a  year  and 
a  half  since  the  publication  of  the  second  part:  the 
bishop  of  Llandaff  undertook  to  write  an  answer-  to  the 
second  part ;  and  it  was  not  until  after  it  was  known 
that  the  author  of  the  Age  of  Reason  would  reply  to 
the  bishop,  that  the  prosecution  against  the  book  was 
set  on  foot,  and  which  is  said  to  be  carried  on  by  some 
of  the  clergy  of  the  English  church.  If  the  bishop  is 
one  of  them,  and  the  object  be  to  prevent  an  exposure  of 
the  numerous  and  gross  errors  he  has  committed  in  his 
work  (and  which  he  wrote  when  report  said  that  Thomas 
Paine  was  dead),  it  is  a  confession  that  he  feels  the  weak- 
ness of  his  cause,  and  finds  himself  unable  to  maintain 
it.  In  this  case,  he  has  given  me  a  triumph  I  did  not 
seek,  and  Mr.  Erskine,  the  herald  of  the  prosecution, 
has  proclaimed  it. 

THOMAS  PAINE. 


A    DISCOURSE 


DELIVERED   TO   THE 


Society  of  Theophilanthropists  at  Paris. 


RELIGION  has  two  principal  enemies,  Fanaticism 
and  Infidelity,  or  that  which  is  called  Atheism. 
The  first  requires  to  be  combated  by  reason  and 
morality,  the  other  by  natural  philosophy. 

The  existence  of  a  God  is  the  first  dogma  of  the  Theo- 
philanthropists. It  is  upon  this  subject  that  I  solicit 
your  attention :  for  though  it  has  been  often  treated  of, 
and  that  most  sublimely,  the  subject  is  inexhaustible; 
and  there  will  always  remain  something  to  be  said  that 
has  not  been  before  advanced.  I  go  therefore  to  open 
the  subject,  and  to  crave  your  attention  to  the  end. 

The  universe  is  the  Bible  of  a  true  Theophilanthropist. 
It  is  there  that  he  reads  of  God.  It  is  there  that  the 
proofs  of  his  existence  are  to  be  sought  and  to  be  found. 
As  to  written  or  printed  books,  by  whatever  name  they 
are  called,  they  are  the  works  of  man's  hands,  and  carr\' 
no  evidence  in  themselves  that  God  is  the  author  of  any 
of  them.  It  must  be  in  something  that  man  could  not 
make,  that  we  must  seek  evidence  for  our  belief,  and 
that  something  is  the  universe — the  true  Bible  —  the 
inimitable  word  of  God. 

Contemplating  the  universe,  the  whole  system  of  crea- 
tion, in  this  point  of  light,  we  shall  discover,  that  all 


AGK   OF   REASON.  3OI 

that  which  is  called  natural  philosophy  is  properly  a 
divine  study.  It  is  the  study  of  God  through  his  works. 
It  is  the  best  study  by  which  we  can  arrive  at  a  knowledge 
of  his  existence,  and  the  only  one  by  which  we  can  gain 
a  glimpse  of  his  perfection. 

Do  we  want  to  contemplate  his  power?  We  see  it  in 
the  immensity  of  the  Creation.  Do  we  want  to  con- 
template his  wisdom  ?  We  see  it  in  the  unchangeable 
order  by  which  the  incomprehensible  whole  is  governed. 
Do  we  want  to  contemplate  his  munificence?  We  see  it 
in  the  abundance  with  which  he  fills  the  earth.  Do  we 
want  to  contemplate  his  mercy?  We  see  it  in  his  not 
withholding  that  abundance  even  from  the  unthankful. 
In  fine,  do  we  want  to  know  what  God  is?  Search  not 
written  or  printed  books,  but  the  scripture  called  the 
Creation. 

It  has  been  the  error  of  the  schools  to  teach  astronomy," 
and  all  the  other  sciences  and  subjects  of  natural  philoso- 
phy, as  accomplishments  only  ;  whereas,  they  should  be 
taught  theologically,  or  with  reference  to  the  Being 
who  is  the  author  of  them  ;  for  all  the  principles  of 
science  are  of  divine  origin.  Man  cannot  make,  or  invent, 
or  contrive  principles — he  can  only  discover  them  ;  and 
he  ought  to  look  through  the  discovery  to  the  author. 

When  we  examine  an  extrordinary  piece  of  machiner>', 
an  astonishing  pile  of  architecture,  a  well-executed 
statue,  or  an  highly-finished  painting,  where  life  and 
action  are  imitated,  and  habit  only  prevents  our  mis- 
taking a  surface  of  light  and  shade  for  cubical  solidity, 
our  ideas  are  naturally  led  to  think  of  the  extensive  genius 
and  talents  of  the  artist.  When  we  study  the  elements 
of  geometry,  we  think  of  Euclid.  When  we  speak  of 
gravitation,  we  think  of  Newton.  How  then  is  it  that 
when  we  study  the  works  of  God  in  the  Creation,  we  stop 
short,  and  do  not  think  of  God  ?  It  is  from  the  error  of 
the  schools  in  having  taught  those  subjects  as  accom- 


302  AGE   OF   REASON. 

plishments  only,  and  thereby  separated  the  study  of  them 
from  the  Being  who  is  the  author  of  them. 

The  schools  have  made  the  study  of  theology  to  con- 
sist in  the  study  of  opinions  in  written  or  printed  books  ; 
whereas  theology  should  be  studied  in  the  works  or 
books  of  the  Creation.  The  study  of  theology  in  books 
of  opinions  has  often  produced  fanaticism,  rancor,  and 
cruelty  of  temper ;  and  from  hence  have  proceeded  the 
numerous  persecutions,  the  fanatical  quarrels,  the  reli- 
gious burnings  and  massacres,  that  have  desolated  Europe. 
But  the  study  of  theology  in  the  works  of  the  Creation, 
produces  a  direct  contrary  effect.  The  mind  becomes  at 
once  enlightened  and  serene — a  copy  of  the  scene  it  be- 
holds ;  information  and  adoration  go  hand  in  hand,  and 
all  the  social  faculties  become  enlarged. 

The  evil  that  has  resulted  from  the  error  of  the  schools 
in  teaching  natural  philosophy  as  an  accomplishment 
only,  has  been  that  of  generating  in  the  pupils  a 
species  of  atheism.  Instead  of  looking  through  the 
works  of  the  Creation  to  the  Creator  himself,  they  stop 
short,  and  employ  the  knowledge  they  acquire  to  create 
doubts  of  his  existence.  They  labor  with  studied  in- 
genuity to  ascribe  every  thing  they  behold  to  innate 
properties  of  matter ;  and  jump  over  all  the  rest  by 
saying  that  matter  is  eternal. 

Let  us  examine  this  subject — it  is  worth  examining; 
for  if  we  examine  it  through  all  its  cases,  the  result  will 
be,  that  the  existence  of  a  superior  cause,  or  that  which 
man  calls  God,  will  be  discoverable  by  philosophical 
principles. 

In  the  first  place,  admitting  matter  to  have  properties, 
as  we  see  it  has,  the  question  still  remains,  How  came 
matter  by  those  properties?  To  this  they  will  answer  that 
matter  possessed  those  properties  eternally.  This  is  not 
solution,  but  assertion ;  and  to  deny  it,  is  equally  as 
impossible  of  proof  as  to  assert  it.     It  is  then  necessary  to 


AGE  OP   REASON.  3Q3 

go  further ;  and  therefore  I  say,  if  there  exists  a  cir- 
cumstance that  is  not  a  property  of  matter,  and  without 
which  the  universe,  or  to  speak  in  a  limited  degree,  the 
solar  system,  composed  of  planets  and  a  sun,  could  not 
exist  a  moment,  all  the  arguments  of  atheism,  drawn 
from  properties  of  matter,  and  applied  to  account  for  the 
universe,  will  be  overthrown,  and  the  existence  of  a 
superior  cause,  or  that  which  man  calls  God,  becomes 
discoverable,  as  is  before  said,  by  natural  philosophy, 

I  go  now  to  show  that  such  a  circumstance  exists,  and 
what  it  is. 

The  universe  is  composed  of  matter,  and,  as  a  system, 
is  sustained  by  motion.  Motion  is  not  a  property  of 
matter,  and  without  this  motion  the  solar  system  could 
not  exist.  Were  motion  a  property  of  matter,  that 
undiscovered  and  undiscoverable  thing  called  perpetual 
motion  would  establish  itself  It  is  because  motion  is  not 
a  property  of  matter  that  perpetual  motion  is  an  impossi- 
bility in  the  hand  of  every  being  but  that  of  the  Creator 
of  motion.  When  the  pretenders  to  atheism  can  produce 
perpetual  motion,  and  not  till  then,  they  may  expect  to  be 
credited. 

The  natural  state  of  matter,  as  to  place,  is  a  state  of 
rest.  Motion,  or  change  of  place,  is  the  effect  of  an 
external  cause  acting  upon  matter.  As  to  that  faculty 
of  matter  that  is  called  gravitation,  it  is  the  influence 
which  two  or  more  bodies  have  reciprocally  on  each 
other  to  unite  and  to  be  at  rest.  Every-  thing  which  has 
hitherto  been  discovered  with  respect  to  the  motion  of 
the  planets  in  the  system,  relates  only  to  the  laws  by 
which  motion  acts,  and  not  to  the  cause  of  motion. 
Gravitation,  so  far  from  being  the  cause  of  motion  to  the 
planets  that  compose  the  solar  system,  would  be  the 
destruction  of  the  solar  system,  were  revolutionary  motion 
to  cease :  for  as  the  action  of  spinning  upholds  a  top,  the 
revolutionary  motion  upholds  the  planets  in  their  orbits, 


304  AGE   OF    REASON. 

and  prevents  them  from  gravitating  and  fonning  one 
mass  with  the  sun.  In  one  sense  of  the  word,  philosophy 
knows,  and  atheism  says,  that  matter  is  in  perpetual 
motion.  But  the  motion  here  meant  refers  to  the  state 
of  matter,  and  that  only  on  the  surface  of  the  earth.  It 
IS  either  decomposition,  which  is  continually  destroying 
the  form  of  bodies  of  matter,  or  recomposition,  which 
renews  that  matter  in  the  same  or  another  form,  as  the 
decomposition  of  animal  or  vegetable  substances  enter 
into  the  composition  of  other  bodies.  But  the  motion 
that  upholds  the  solar  system  is  of  an  entire  dijBferent 
kind,  and  is  not  a  property  of  matter.  It  operates  also  to 
an  entire  different  effect.  It  operates  to  perpetual  pre- 
servation^ and  to  prevent  any  change  in  the  state  of  the 
system. 

Giving  then  to  matter  all  the  properties  which  philoso- 
phy knows  it  has,  or  all  that  atheism  ascribes  to  it,  and 
can  prove,  and  even  supposing  matter  to  be  eternal,  it 
will  not  account  for  the  system  of  the  universe,  or  of  the 
solar  system,  because  it  will  not  account  for  motion,  and 
it  is  motion  that  preserves  it.  When,  therefore,  we  dis- 
cover a  circumstance  of  such  immense  importance,  that 
without  it  the  universe  could  not  exist,  and  for  which 
neither  matter,  nor  any  nor  all  the  properties  of  matter 
can  account ;  we  are  by  necessity  forced  into  the  rational 
and  comfortable  belief  of  the  existence  of  a  cause  superior 
to  matter,  and  that  cause  man  calls  God. 

As  to  that  which  is  called  nature,  it  is  no  other  than 
the  laws  by  which  motion  and  action  of  every  kind,  with 
respect  to  unintelligible  matter,  is  regulated.  And  when 
we  speak  of  looking  through  nature  up  to  nature's  God, 
we  speak  philosophically  the  same  rational  language  as 
when  we  speak  of  looking  through  human  laws  up  to 
the  power  that  ordained  them. 

God  is  the  power  or  first  cause,  nature  is  the  law,  and 
matter  is  the  subject  acted  upon. 


AGK  OF   RKASON.  3O5 

But  infidelity,  by  ascribing  every  phenomenon  to  pro- 
perties of  matter,  conceives  a  system  for  which  it  cannot 
account,  and  yet  it  pretends  to  demonstration.  It  reasons 
from  what  it  sees  on  the  surface  of  the  earth,  but  it  does 
not  carry  itself  to  the  solar  system  existing  by  motion. 
It  sees  upon  the  surface  a  perpetual  decomposition  and 
recomposition  of  matter.  It  sees  that  an  oak  produces 
an  acorn,  an  acorn  an  oak,  a  bird  an  egg,  an  egg  a  bird, 
and  so  on.  In  things  of  this  kind  it  sees  something 
which  it  calls  natural  cause,  but  none  of  the  causes  it 
sees  is  the  cause  of  that  motion  which  preserves  the  solar 
system. 

Let  us  contemplate  this  wonderful  and  stupendous 
system  consisting  of  matter  and  existing  by  motion.  It 
is  not  matter  in  a  state  of  rest,  nor  in  a  state  of  decom- 
position or  recomposition.  It  is  matter  systematized  in 
perpetual  orbicular  or  circular  motion.  As  a  system 
that  motion  is  the  life  of  it,  as  animation  is  life  to  an 
animal  body;  deprive  the  system  of  motion,  and,  as  a 
system,  it  must  expire.  Who,  then,  breathed  into  the 
system  the  life  of  motion?  What  power  impelled  the 
planets  to  move,  since  motion  is  not  a  property  of  the 
matter  of  which  they  are  composed. 

If  we  contemplate  the  immense  velocity  of  this  motion, 
our  wonder  becomes  increased,  and  our  adoration  en- 
larges itself  in  the  same  proportion.  To  instance  only 
one  of  the  planets,  that  of  the  earth  we  inhabit,  its 
distance  from  the  sun,  the  centre  of  the  orbits  of  all 
the  planets  is,  according  to  observations  of  the  transit 
of  the  planet  Venus,  about  one  hundred  million  miles ; 
consequently,  the  diameter  of  the  orbit  or  circle  in  which 
the  earth  moves  round  the  sun,  is  double  that  distance, 
and  the  measure  of  the  circumference  of  the  orbit, 
taken  as  three  times  its  diameter,  is  six  hundred  million 
miles.  The  earth  performs  this  voyage  in  365  days  and 
some  hours,  and  consequently  moves  at  the  rate  of  more 


306  AGE   OF   REASON. 

than   one   million   six   hundred    thousand   miles   every 
twenty-four  hours. 

Where  will  infidelity,  where  will  atheism  find  cause 
for  this  astonishing  velocity  of  motion,  never  ceasing, 
never  varying,  and  which  is  the  preservation  of  the  earth 
in  its  orbit?  It  is  not  by  reasoning  from  an  acorn  to  an 
oak,  or  from  any  change  in  the  state  of  matter  on  the 
surface  of  the  earth,  that  this  can  be  accounted  for.  Its 
cause  is  not  to  be  found  in  matter,  nor  in  any  thing  we 
call  nature. 

The  atheist  who  affects  to  reason,  and  the  fanatic  who 
rejects  reason,  plunge  themselves  alike  into  inextricable 
difficulties.  The  one  perverts  the  sublime  and  enlight- 
ening study  of  natural  philosophy  into  a  deformity  of 
absurdities,  by  not  reasoning  to  the  end  ;  the  other  loses 
himself  in  the  obscurity  of  metaphysical  theories,  and 
dishonors  the  Creator,  by  treating  the  study  of  his  works 
with  contempt.  The  one  is  a  half  rational  of  whom 
there  is  some  hope ;  the  other  a  visionary  to  whom  we 
must  be  charitable. 

When  at  first  thought  we  think  of  a  Creator,  our  ideas 
appear  to  us  undefined  and  confused ;  but  if  we  reason 
philosophically,  those  ideas  can  be  easily  arranged  and 
simplified.  It  is  a  Being  whose  power  is  equal  to  his 
will.  Observe  the  nature  of  the  will  of  man.  It  is  of 
an  infinite  quality.  We  cannot  conceive  the  possibility 
of  limits  to  the  will.  Observe,  on  the  other  hand,  how 
exceedingly  limited  is  his  power  of  acting  compared  with 
the  nature  of  his  will.  Suppose  the  power,  equal  to  the 
will,  and  man  would  be  a  God.  He  would  will  himself 
eternal,  and  be  so.  He  could  will  a  creation  and  could 
make  it. 

In  this  progressive  reasoning,  we  see  in  the  nature 
of  the  will  of  man,  half  of  that  which  we  conceive  in 
thinking  of  God ;  add  the  other  half,  and  we  have  the 
whole  idea  of  a  being  who  could  make  the  universe,  and 


AGE   OK    REASON.  307 

sustain  it  by  perpetual  motion,  because  he  could  create 
that  motion. 

We  know  nothing  of  the  capacity  of  the  will  of  animals, 
but  we  know  a  great  deal  of  the  difference  of  their 
powers.  For  example,  how  numerous  are  the  degrees, 
and  how  immense  is  the  difference  of  power,  from  a  mite 
to  a  man  !  Since  then  every  thing  we  see  below  us  shows 
a  progression  of  power,  where  is  the  difficulty  in  sup- 
posing that  there  is,  at  the  summit  of  all  things^  a  Being 
in  whom  an  infinity  of  po\^er  unites  witli  the  infinity  of 
the  will?  When  this  simple  idea  presents  itself  to  our 
mind,  we  have  the  idea  of  a  perfect  being  that  man 
calls  God. 

It  is  comfortable  to  live  under  the  belief  of  the  exist- 
ence of  an  infinitely  protecting  power ;  and  it  is  an 
addition  to  that  comfort  to  know  that  such  a  belief  is  not 
a  mere  conceit  of  the  imagination,  as  many  of  the 
theories  that  are  called  religious  are  ;  nor  a  belief  founded 
only  on  tradition  or  received  opinion,  but  is  a  belief 
deducible  by  the  action  of  reason  upon  the  things  that 
compose  the  system  of  the  universe ;  a  belief  arising  out 
of  visible  facts :  and  so  demonstrable  is  the  truth  of  this 
belief,  that  if  no  such  belief  had  existed,  the  persons  who 
now  controvert  it  would  have  been  the  persons  who 
would  have  produced  and  propagated  it,  because  by 
beginning  to  reason,  they  would  have  been  led  on  to 
reason  progressiyely  to  the  end,  and  thereby  have  dis- 
covered that  matter,  and  all  the  properties  it  has,  will  not 
account  for  the  system  of  the  universe,  and  that  there 
must  necessarily  be  a  superior  cause. 

It  was  the  excess  to  which  imaginary  systems  of  reli- 
gion had  been  carried,  and  the  intolerance,  persecutions, 
burnings,  and  massacres  they  occasioned,  that  first  in- 
duced certain  persons  to  propagate  infidelity  ;  thinking 
that  upon  the  whole  it  was  better  not  to  believe  at  all, 
than  to  believe  a  multitude  of  things  and  complicated 


308  AGE   OF   REASON. 

creeds,  that  occasioned  so  much  mischief  in  the  world. 
But  those  days  are  passed  ;  persecution  has  ceased,  and 
the  antidote  then  set  up  against  it  has  no  longer  even  the 
shadow  of  an  apology.  We  profess  and  we  proclaim  in 
peace,  the  pure,  unmixed,  comfortable,  and  rational 
belief  of  a  God,  as  manifested  to  us  in  the  universe.  We 
do  this  without  any  apprehension  of  that  belief  being 
made  a  cause  of  persecution,  as  other  beliefs  have  been, 
or  of  suffering  persecution  ourselves.  To  God,  and  not 
to  man,  are  all  men  to  account  for  their  belief 

It  has  been  well  observed  at  the  first  institution  of  this 
society,  that  the  dogmas  it  professes  to  believe,  are  from 
the  commencement  of  the  world ;  that  they  are  not 
novelties,  but  are  confessedly  the  basis  of  all  systems  of 
Teligion,  however  numerous  and  contradictory  they  may 
be.  All  men  in  the  outset  of  the  religion  they  profess 
are  Theophilanthropists.  It  is  impossible  to  form  any 
system  of  religion  without  building  upon  those  principles, 
and  therefore  they  are  not  sectarian  principles,  unless  we 
suppose  a  sect  composed  of  all  the  world. 

I  have  said  in  the  course  of  this  discourse,  that  the 
study  of  natural  philosophy  is  a  divine  study,  because  it 
is  the  study  of  the  works  of  God  in  the  Creation.  If  we 
consider  theology  upon  this  ground,  what  an  extensive 
field  of  improvement  in  things  both  divine  and  human 
opens  itself  before  us  !  All  the  principles  of  science  are 
of  divine  origin.  It  was  not  man  that  invented  the 
principles  on  which  astronomy  and  every  branch  of  mathe- 
matics are  founded  and  studied.  It  was  not  man  that 
gave  properties  to  the  circle  and  the  triangle.  Those 
principles  are  eternal  and  immutable.  We  see  in  them 
the  unchangeable  nature  of  the  Divinity.  We  see  in 
them  immortality,  and  immortality  existing  after  the 
material  figures  that  express  those  properties  are  dissolved 
in  dust. 

The  society  is  at  present  in  its  infancy,  and  its  means 


AGE  OF   REASON.  309 

are  small ;  but  I  wish  to  hold  in  view  the  subject  I  allude 
to,  and  instead  of  teaching  the  philosophical  branches  of 
learning  as  ornamental  accomplishments  only,  as  they 
have  hitherto  been  taught,  to  teach  them  in  a  manner 
that  shall  combine  theological  knowledge  with  scientific 
instruction :  to  do  this  to  the  best  advantage,  some 
instruments  will  be  necessary  for  the  purpose  of  explana- 
tion, of  which  the  society  is  not  yet  possessed.  But  as 
the  views  of  the  society  extend  to  public  good,  as  well  as 
to  that  of  the  individual,  and  as  its  principles  can  have 
no  enemies,  means  may  be  devised  to  procure  them. 

If  we  unite  to  the  present  instruction  a  series  of  lec- 
tures on  the  ground  I  have  mentioned,  we  shall,  in  the 
first  place,  render  theology  the  most  delightful  and 
entertaining  of  all  studies.  In  the  next  place,  we  shall 
give  scientific  instruction  to  those  who  could  not  other- 
wise obtain.it.  The  mechanic  of  every  profession  will 
there  be  taught  the  mathematical  principles  necessary  to 
render  him  a  proficient  in  his  art;  the  cultivator  will 
there  see  developed,  the  principles  of  vegetation  ;  while, 
at  the  same  time,  they  will  be  led  to  see  the  hand  of  God 
in  all  these  things. 


A  LETTER  TO  CAMILLE  JORDAN, 

ONE   OF   THE   COUNCIL    OF    FIVE    HUNDRED, 

CKXASIONED   BY   HIS   REPORT   ON    THE   PRIESTS,    PUBLIC 
WORSHIP,  AND  THE  BELLS. 


Citizen  Representative  : 

AS  every  thing  in  your  report,  relating  to  what  you 
h\  call  worship,*  connects  itself  with  the  books  called 
the  Scriptures,  I  begin  with  a  quotation  therefrom. 
It  may  serve  to  give  us  some  idea  of  the  fanciful  origin 
and  fabrication  of  those  books.  2  Cronicles,  chap,  xxxiv, 
ver.  14,  &c.,  "Hilkiah  the  priest  y^ww^  the  book  of  the 
law  of  the  Lord  given  by  Moses.  And  Hilkiah  the 
priest  said  to  Shaphan  the  scribe,  I  have  found  the  book 
of  the  law  in  the  house  of  the  Lord,  and  Hilkiah 
delivered  the  book  to  Shaphan.  And  Shaphan  the 
scribe  told  the  king  [  Josiah],  saying,  Hilkiah,  the  priest, 
hath  given  me  a  book." 

This  pretended  finding  was  about  a  thousand  years 
after  the  time  that  Moses  is  said  to  have  lived.  Before 
this  pretended  finding  there  was  no  such  thing  practised 
or  known  in  the  world  as  that  which  is  called  the  law  of 
Moses.  This  being  the  case,  there  is  every  apparent 
evidence,  that  the  books  called  the  books  of  Moses  (and 
which  make  the  first  part  of  what  are  called  the  Scrip- 
tures, )are  forgeries,  contrived  between  a  priest  and  a  limb 
of  the  law,*  Hilkiah,  and  Shaphan,  the  scribe,  a  thou- 
sand years  after  Moses  is  said  to  have  been  dead. 

*  It  happens  that  Camille  Jordan  is  a  limb  of  the  law. 


OAMILLE  JORDAN. 


AGE  OF  REASON.  311 

Thus  much  for  the  hrst  part  of  the  Bible.  Every  other 
part  is  marked  with  circumstances  equally  as  suspicious. 
We  ought,  therefore,  to  be  reverentially  careful  how  we 
ascribe  books  as  his  word^  of  which  there  is  no  evidence, 
and  against  which  there  is  abundant  evidence  to  the 
contrary,  and  ever>'  cause  to  suspect  imposition. 

In  your  report,  you  speak  continually  of  something  by 
the  name  of  worship,  and  you  confine  yourself  to  speak 
of  one  kind  only,  as  if  there  were  but  one,  and  that  one 
was  unquestionably  true. 

The  modes  of  worship  are  as  various  as  the  sects  are 
numerous ;  and  amidst  all  this  variety  and  multiplicity 
there  is  but  one  article  of  belief  in  which  every  religion 
in  the  world  agrees.  That  article  has  universal  sanction. 
It  is  the  belief  of  a  God,  or  what  the  Greeks  described 
by  the  word  Theism^  and  the  Latins  by  that  of  Deism. 
Upon  this  one  article  have  been  erected  all  the  different 
superstructures  of  creeds  and  ceremonies  continually 
warring  with  each  other  that  now  exist  or  ever  existed. 
But  the  men  most  and  best  informed  upon  the  subject  of 
theology  rest  themselves  upon  this  universal  article,  and 
hold  all  the  various  superstructures  erected  thereon  to  be 
at  least  doubtful,  if  not  altogether  artificial. 

The  intellectual  part  of  religion  is  a  private  affair 
between  every  man  and  his  Maker,  and  in  which  no 
third  party  has  any  right  to  interfere.  The  practical 
part  consists  in  our  doing  good  to  each  other.  But  since 
religion  has  been  made  into  a  trade,  the  practical 
part  has  been  made  to  consist  of  ceremonies  performed  by 
men  called  priests ;  and  the  people  have  been  anmsed 
with    ceremonial    shows,    processions,    and   bells.*     By 

*  The  precise  date  of  the  invention  of  bells  cannot  be  traced.  The  ancients,  it 
appears  from  Martial,  Juvenal,  Suetonius  and  uthers,  had  an  article  named  tintinu- 
abula,  (usually  translated  bell,)  by  which  the  Romans  were  summoned  to  their  baths 
and  public  places.  It  seems  most  probable,  that  the  description  of  bells  now  used  in 
churches,  were  invented  about  the  year  of  400,  and  generally  adopted  before  the  com- 
mencement of  the  seventh  century.  Previous  to  their  invention,  however,  sounding 
iirass,  and  sometimes  basins,  were  used ;    and  to  the  present  day  the  Greek  church 


312  AGE   OF   REASON. 

devices  of  this  kiud  true  religion  has  been  banished  ; 
and  such  means  have  been  found  out  to  extract  money 
even  from  the  pockets  of  the  poor,  instead  of  contributing 
to  their  relief. 

No  man  ought  to  make  a  living  by  religion  :  it  is  dis- 
honest so  to  do.  Religion  is  not  an  act  that  can  be 
performed  by  proxy  :  one  person  cannot  act  religion  for 
another.  Every  person  must  perform  it  for  himself: 
and  all  that  a  priest  can  do  is  to  take  from  him, —  he 
wants  nothing  but  his  money, — and  then  to  riot  on  his 
spoil  and  laugh  at  his  credulity. 

The  only  people,  as  a  professional  sect  of  Christians, 
who   provide   for  the  poor  of  their  society,  are   people 

have  boards  or  iron  plates,  full  of  holes,  which  they  strike  with  a  hammer,  or  mallet, 
to  summon  the  priests  and  others  to  divine  service.  VVe  may  also  remark,  that  in  our 
own  country,  it  was  the  custom  in  monasteries  to  visit  every  person's  cell  early  in  the 
morning,  and  knock  on  the  door  with  a  similar  instrument,  called  the  wakening 
mallet  —  doubtless  no  very  pleasing  intrusion  on  the  slumbers  of  the  Monks. 

But,  the  use  of  bells  having  been  established,  it  was  found  that  devils  were  terrified 
at  the  sound,  and  slunk  in  haste  away;  in  consequence  of  which  it  was  thought 
necessary  to  baptize  them  in  a  solemn  manner,  which  appears  to  have  been  first  done 
by  Pope  John  XII.  A.  D.  968.  A  record  of  this  practice  still  exists  in  the  Tom  of  Lin- 
coln, and  the  great  Tom  at  Oxford,  &c. 

Having  thus  laid  the  foundation  of  superstitious  veneration,  in  the  hearts  of  the 
common  people,  it  cannot  be  a  matter  of  surprise,  that  they  were  soon  used  at  rejoic- 
ings, and  high  festivals  in  the  church  (for  the  purpose  of  driving  away  any  evil  spirit 
which  might  be  in  the  neighborhood)  as  well  as  on  the  arrival  of  any  great  personage, 
on  which  occasion  the  usual  fee  was  one  penny. 

One  other  custom  remains  to  be  explained,  viz.,  tolling  bell  on  the  occasion  of  any 
person's  death,  a  custom  which,  in  the  manner  now  practised,  is  totally  different  from 
its  original  institution.  It  appears  to  have  been  used  as  early  as  the  7ih  century,  when 
bells  were  first  generally  used,  and  to  have  been  denominated  the  soul-bell,  (as  it 
signified  the  departing  of  the  soul,)  as  also  the  passing  bell.  Thus  Wheatly  tells  us, 
"Our  church,  in  imitation  of  the  Saints  of  former  ages,  calls  in  the  Minister  and 
others  who  are  at  hand,  to  assist  their  brother  in  his  last  extremity ;  in  order  to 
do  this,  she  directs  a  bell  should  be  tolled  when  any  one  is  passing  out  of  this  life." 
Durand  also  says — "When  any  one  is  dying,  bells  must  be  tolled,  that  the  people 
may  put  up  their  prayers  for  him  ;  let  this  be  done  twice  for  a  woman,  and  thrice 
for  a  man.  If  for  a  clergyman,  as  many  times  as  he  had  orders;  and,  at  the  conclu- 
sion, a  peal  on  all  the  bells,  to  distinguish  the  quality  of  the  person  for  whom  the 
people  are  to  put  up  their  prayers." — From  these  passages,  it  appears  evident  that 
the  bell  was  to  be  tolled  be/ore  a  person's  decease  rather  than  after,  as  at  the  present 
day ;  and  that  the  object  was  to  obtain  the  prayers  of  all  who  heard  it,  for  the  repose 
of  the  soul  of  their  departing  neighbor.  At  first,  when  the  tolling  took  place  after  the 
person's  decease,  it  was  deemed  superstitious,  and  was  partially  disused,  which  was 
found  materially  to  affect  the  revenue  of  the  church.  The  priesthood  having  removed 
the  objection,  bells  were  again  tolled,  upon  payment  of  the  customary  fees. —  English 
Paper. 


AGS  OF   REASON.  313 

known  by  the  name  of  Quakers.  These  men  have  no 
priests;  they  assemble  quietly  in  their  places  of  meeting, 
and  do  not  disturb  their  neighbors  with  shows  and  noise 
of  bells.  Religion  does  not  unite  itself  to  show  and 
noise.  True  religion  is  without  either ;  where  there  is 
both  there  is  no  true  religion. 

The  first  object  for  inquiry  in  all  cases,  more  especially 
in  matters  of  religious  concern,  is  truth.  We  ought  to 
inquire  into  the  truth  of  whatever  we  are  taught  to 
believe,  and  it  is  certain  that  the  books  called  the  Scrip- 
tures stand,  in  this  respect,  in  more  than  a  doubtful 
predicament.  They  have  been  held  in  existence,  and  in 
a  sort  of  credit  among  the  common  class  of  people,  by 
art,  terror,  and  persecution.  They  have  little  or  no 
credit  among  the  enlightened  part,  but  they  have  been 
made  the  means  of  encumbering  the  world  with  a 
numerous  priesthood,  who  have  fattened  on  the  labor  of 
the  people,  and  consumed  the  sustenance  that  ought  to 
be  applied  to  the  widows  and  the  poor. 

It  is  a  want  of  feeling  to  talk  of  priests  and  bells  whilst 
so  many  infants  are  perishing  in  the  hospitals,  and  aged 
and  infirm  poor  in  the  streets,  from  the  want  of  necessa- 
ries. The  abundance  that  France  produces  is  sufficient 
for  every  want,  if  rightly  applied  ;  but  priests  and  bells, 
like  articles  of  luxury,  ought  to  be  the  least  articles  of 
consideration. 

We  talk  of  religion.  Let  us  talk  of  truth  ;  for  that 
which  is  not  truth  is  not  worthy  the  name  of  religion. 

We  see  different  parts  of  the  world  overspread  with 
different  books,  each  of  which,  though  contradictory  to 
the  other,  is  said  by  the  partisans  to  be  of  divine  origin, 
and  is  made  a  rule  of  faith  and  practice.  In  countries 
under  despotic  governments,  where  inquiry  is  always 
forbidden,  the  people  are  condemned  to  believe  as  they 
have  been  taught  by  their  priests.  This  was  for  many 
centuries  the  case  in  France :  but  this  link  in  the  chain 


314  AGE  OF   REASON. 

of  slavery  is  happily  broken  by  the  revolution  ;  and,  that 
it  never  be  rivetted  again,  let  us  employ  a  part  of  the 
liberty  we  enjoy  in  scrutinizing  into  the  truth.  Let  us 
leave  behind  us  some  monument,  that  we  have  made  the 
cause  and  honor  of  our  Creator  an  object  of  our  care.  If 
we  have  been  imposed  upon  by  the  terrors  of  government 
and  the  artifice  of  priests  in  matters  of  religion,  let  us  do 
justice  to  our  Creator  by  examining  into  the  case.  His 
name  is  too  sacred  to  be  affixed  to  any  thing  which  is 
fabulous;  and  it  is  our  duty  to  inquire  whether  we 
believe,  or  encourage  the  people  to  believ-e,  in  fables  or 
in  facts. 

It  would  be  a  project  worthy  the  situation  we  are  in, 
to  invite  an  inquiry  of  this  kind.  We  have  committees 
for  various  objects ;  and,  among  others,  a  committee  for 
bells.  We  have  institutions,  academies,  and  societies 
for  various  purposes ;  but  we  have  none  for  inquiring 
into  historical  truth  in  matters  of  religious  concern. 

They  show  us  certain  books  which  they  call  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  the  word  of  God,  and  other  names  of  that 
kind  ;  but  we  ought  to  know  what  evidence  there  is  for 
our  believing  them  to  be  so,  and  at  what  time  they 
originated  and  in  what  manner.  We  know  that  men 
could  make  books,  and  we  know  that  artifice  and  super- 
stition could  give  them  a  name  —  could  call  them  sacred. 
But  we  ought  to  be  careful  that  the  name  of  our  Creator 
be  not  abused.  Let  then  all  the  evidence  with  respect 
to  those  books  be  made  a  subject  of  inquir\\  If  there  be 
evidence  to  warrant  our  belief  of  them,  let  us  encourage 
the  propagation  of  it ;  but  if  not,  let  us  be  careful  not  to 
promote  the  cause  of  delusion  and  falsehood. 

I  have  already  spoken  of  the  Quakers — that  they  have 
no  priests,  no  bells — and  that  they  are  remarkable  for 
their  care  of  the  poor  of  their  society.  They  are  equally 
as  remarkable  for  the  education  of  their  children.  I  am 
a  descendant  of  a  family  of  that  profession  ;  my  father 


AGE  OF   REASON.  315 

was  a  Quaker:  and  I  presume  I  may  be  admitted  an 
evidence  of  what  I  assert.  The  seeds  of  good  principles, 
and  the  literary  means  of  advancement  in  the  world,  are 
laid  in  early  life.  Instead,  therefore,  of  consuming  the 
substance  of  the  nation  upon  priests,  whose  life  at  best 
is  a  life  of  idleness,  let  us  think  of  providing  for  the 
education  of  those  who  have  not  the  means  of  doing  it 
themselves.  One  good  schoolmaster  is  of  more  use  than 
a  hundred  priests. 

If  we  look  back  at  what  was  the  condition  of  France 
under  the  ancient  regime,  we  cannot  acquit  the  priests  of 
corrupting  the  morals  of  the  nation.  Their  pretended 
celibacy  led  them  to  carry  debauchery  and  domestic 
infidelity  into  every  family  where  they  could  gain  ad- 
mission ;  and  their  blasphemous  pretensions  to  forgive 
sins  encouraged  the  commission  of  them.  Why  has  the 
Revolution  of  France  been  stained  with  crimes  which  the 
Revolution  of  the  United  States  of  America  was  not? 
Men  are  physically  the  same  in  all  countries  ;  it  is  educa- 
tion that  makes  them  different.  Accustom  a  people  to 
believe  that  priests  or  any  other  class  of  men  can  forgive 
sins,  and  you  will  have  sins  in  abundance. 

I  come  now  to  speak  more  particularly  to  the  object  of 
your  report. 

You  claim  a  privilege  incompatible  with  the  constitu- 
tion and  with  rights.  The  constitution  protects  equally, 
as  it  ought  to  do,  every  profession  of  religion  ;  it  gives 
no  exclusive  privilege  to  any.  The  churches  are  the 
common  property  of  all  the  people :  they  are  national 
goods,  and  cannot  be  given  exclusively  to  any  one  pro- 
fession, because  the  right  does  not  exist  of  giving  to  any 
one  that  which  appertains  to  all.  It  would  be  consistent 
with  right  that  the  churches  be  sold,  and  the  money 
arising  therefrom  be  invested  as  a  fund  for  the  education 
of  children  of  poor  parents  of  every  profession,  and,  if 
more  than  sufficient  for  this  purpose,  that  the  surplus  be 


3l6  AGE  OF  REASON. 

appropriated  to  the  support  of  the  aged  poor.  After  this, 
every  profession  can  erect  its  own  place  of  worship,  if 
it  choose — support  its  own  priests,  if  it  choose  to  have 
any  —  or  perforin  its  worship  without  priests,  as  the 
Quakers  do. 

As  to  bells,  they  are  a  public  nuisance.  If  one  pro- 
fession is  to  have  bells,  another  has  the  right  to  use 
instruments  of  the  same  kind,  or  any  other  noisy  instru- 
ment. Some  may  choose  to  meet  at  the  sound  of  cannon, 
another  at  the  beat  of  drum,  another  at  the  sound  of 
trumpets,  and  so  on,  until  the  whole  becomes  a  scene  of 
general  confusion.  But  if  we  permit  oui selves  to  think 
of  the  state  of  the  sick,  and  the  many  sleepless  nights 
and  days  they  undergo,  we  shall  feel  the  impropriety  of 
increasing  their  distress  by  the  noise  of  bells,  or  any  other 
noisy  instruments. 

Quiet  and  private  domestic  devotion  neither  offends 
nor  incommodes  any  body  ;  and  the  constitution  has 
wisely  guarded  against  the  use  of  externals.  Bells  come 
under  this  description,  and  public  processions  still  more 
so — streets  and  highways  are  for  the  accommodation 
of  persons  following  their  several  occupations,  and  no 
sectary  has  a  right  to  incommode  them.  If  any  one  has, 
every  other  has  the  same ;  and  the  meeting  of  various 
and  contradictory  processions  would  be  tumultuous. 
Those  who  formed  the  constitution  had  wisely  reflected 
upon  these  cases ;  and,  whilst  they  were  careful  to  pre- 
serve the  equal  right  of  every  one,  they  restrained  every 
one  from  giving  offence  or  incommoding  another. 

Men  who,  through  a  long  and  tumultuous  scene,  have 
lived  in  retirement,  as  you  have  done,  may  think,  when 
they  arrive  at  power,  that  nothing  is  more  easy  than  to 
put  the  world  to  rights  in  an  instant ;  they  form  to  them- 
selves gay  ideas  at  the  success  of  their  projects  ;  but  they 
forget  to  contemplate  the  difficulties  that  attend  them, 
and  the  dangers  with  whiclv  tliey  are  pregnant.     Alas ! 


AGE  OF   REASON.  317 

nothing  is  so  easy  as  to  deceive  one's  self.  Did  all  men 
think  as  you  think,  or  as  you  say,  your  plan  would  need 
no  advocate,  because  it  would  have  no  opposer ;  but  there 
are  millions  who  think  diflferently  to  you,  and  who  are 
determined  to  be  neither  the  dupes  nor  the  slaves  of  error 
or  design. 

It  is  your  good  fortune  to  arrive  at  power,  when  the 
sunshine  of  prosperity  is  breathing  forth  after  a  long  and 
stormy  night.  The  firmness  of  your  colleagues,  and  of 
those  you  have  suceeded  —  the  unabated  energy  of  the 
Directory,  and  the  unequalled  bravery  of  the  armies  of 
the  Republic,  have  made  the  way  smooth  and  easy  to  you. 
If  you  look  back  at  the  difficulties  that  existed  when  the 
constitution  commenced,  you  cannot  but  be  confounded 
with  admiration  at  the  difference  between  that  time  and 
now.  At  that  moment,  the  Directory  were  placed  like 
the  forlorn  hope  of  an  army,  but  you  were  in  safe  retire- 
ment. They  occupied  the  post  of  honorable  danger,  and 
they  have  merited  well  of  their  country. 

You  talk  of  justice  and  benevolence,  but  you  begin  at 
the  wrong  end.  The  defenders  of  your  country,  and  the 
deplorable  state  of  the  poor,  are  objects  of  prior  considera- 
tion to  priests  and  bells  and  gaudy  processions. 

You  talk  of  peace,  but  your  manner  of  talking  of  it 
embarrasses  the  Directory  in  making  it,  and  serves  to 
prevent  it.  Had  you  been  an  actor  in  all  the  scenes  of 
government  from  its  commencement,  you  would  have 
been  too  well  informed  to  have  brought  forward  projects 
that  operate  to  encourage  the  enemy.  When  you  arrived 
at  a  share  in  the  government,  you  found  ever>'  thing 
tending  to  a  prosperous  issue.  A  series  of  victories 
unequalled  in  the  world,  and  in  the  obtaining  of  which 
you  had  no  share,  preceded  your  arrival.  Every  enemy 
but  one  was  subdued  ;  and  that  one,  (the  Hanoverian 
government  of  England,)  deprived  of  every  hope,  and  a 
bankrupt  in  all  its  resources,  was  sueing  for  peace.     In 


3l8  AGE   OF    REASON. 

such  a  state  of  things,  no  new  question  that  might  tend 
to  agitate  and  anarchize  the  interior  ought  to  have  had 
place ;  and  the  project  you  propose  tends  directly  to 
that  end. 

Whilst  France  was  a  monarchy,  and  under  the  govern- 
ment of  those  things  called  kings  and  priests,  England 
could  always  defeat  her ;  but  since  France  has  risen  to 

BE  A  REPUBLIC,  the  GOVERNMENT  OF  ENGLAND  croUcheS 

beneath  her,  so  great  is  the  difference  between  a  govern- 
ment of  kings  and  priests,  and  that  which  is  founded  on 
the  system  of  representation.  But,  could  the  govern- 
ment of  England  find  a  way,  under  the  sanction  of  your 
report,  to  inundate  France  with  a  flood  of  emigrant 
priests,  she  would  find  also  the  way  to  domineer  as 
before ;  she  would  retrieve  her  shattered  finances  at  your 
expense,  and  the  ringing  of  bells  would  be  the  tocsin  of 
your  downfall. 

Did  peace  consist  in  nothing  but  the  cessation  of  war, 
it  would  not  be  difficult ;  but  the  terms  are  yet  to  be 
arranged  :  and  those  terms  will  be  better  or  worse,  in 
proportion  as  France  and  her  councils  be  united  or 
divided.  That  the  government  of  England  counts  much 
upon  your  report,  and  upon  others  of  a  similar  tendency, 
is  what  the  writer  of  this  letter,  who  knows  that  govern- 
ment well,  has  no  doubt.  You  are  but  new  on  the 
theatre  pf  government,  and  you  ought  to  suspect  your- 
self of  misjudging;  the  experience  of  those  who  have 
gone  before  you  should  be  of  some  service  to  you. 

But  if,  in  consequence  of  such  measures  as  you  propose, 
you  put  it  out  of  the  power  of  the  Directory  to  make  a 
good  peace,  and  to  accept  of  terms  you  would  afterwards 
reprobate,  it  is  yourselves  that  must  bear  the  censure. 

You  conclude  your  report  by  the  following  address  to 
your  colleagues  : — 

"Let  us  hasten,  representatives  of  the  people  !  to  affix 
to  these  tutelary  laws  the  seal  of  our  unanimous  appro- 


AGK   OF    REASON.  319 

batioii.  All  our  fellow-citizens  will  learn  to  cherish 
political  liberty  from  the  enjoyment  of  religious  liberty  : 
you  will  have  broken  the  most  powerful  arm  of  your 
enemies :  you  will  have  surrounded  this  assembly  with 
the  most  impregnable  rampart — confidence,  and  the 
people's  love.  O !  my  colleagues !  how  desirable  is  that 
popularity  which  is  the  offspring  of  good  laws  !  What 
a  consolation  it  will  be  to  us  hereafter,  when  returned  to 
our  own  fire-sides,  to  hear  from  the  mouths  of  our  fellow- 
citizens  these  simple  expressions  — Blessings  retvardyou^ 
men  of  peace!  you  have  restored  to  us  our  temples — our 
ministers — the  liberty  0/ adoring  the  God  0/  our  fathers  : 
you  have  recalled  harmony  to  our  families  —  morality  to 
our  hearts;  you  have  made  us  adore  the  legislature,  and 
respect  all  its  laws  / ' ' 

Is  it  possible,  citizen  representative,  that  you  can -be 
serious  in  this  address?  Were  the  lives  of  the  priests 
under  the  ancient  regime  such  as  to  justify  any  thing 
you  say  of  them?  Were  not  all  France  convinced  of 
their  immorality?  Were  they  not  considered  as  the 
patrons  of  debauchery  and  domestic  infidelity,  and  not  as 
the  patrons  of  morals?  What  was  their  pretended  celibacy 
but  perpetual  adulter}-?  What  was  their  blasphemous 
pretensions  to  forgive  sins,  but  an  encouragement  to  the 
commission  of  them,  and  a  love  for  their  own?  Do  you 
want  to  lead  again  into  France  all  the  vices  of  which 
they  have  been  the  patrons,  and  to  overspread  the  repub- 
lic with  English  pensioners?  It  is  cheaper  to  corrupt 
than  to  conquer  ;  and  the  English  government,  unable  to 
conquer,  will  stoop  to  corrupt.  Arrogance  and  meanness, 
though  in  appearance  opposite,  are  vices  of  the  same 
heart. 

Instead  of  concluding  in  the  manner  you  have  done, 
you  ought  rather  to  have  said  : 

"  O  !  my  colleagues !  we  are  arrived  at  a  glorious  period 
—  a   period    that   promis'^';   mnr*^   than    we   could   have 


320  AGE  OF   REASON. 

expected,  and  all  that  we  could  ha\e  wished.  Let  us 
hasten  to  take  into  consideration  the  honors  and  rewards 
due  to  our  brave  defenders.  Let  us  hasten  to  give 
encouragement  to  agriculture  and  manufactures,  that 
commerce  may  reinstate  itself,  and  our  people  have 
employment.  Let  us  review  the  condition  of  the  suffer- 
ing poor,  and  wipe  from  our  country  the  reproach  of 
forgetting  them.  Let  us  devise  means  to  establish 
schools  of  instruction,  that  we  may  banish  the  ignorance 
that  the  ancient  regime  of  kings  and  priests  had  spread 
among  the  people.  Let  us  propagate  morality,  unfettered 
by  superstition — let  us  cultivate  justice  and  benevolence, 
that  the  God  of  our  fathers  may  bless  us.  The  helpless 
infant  and  the  aged  poor  cry  to  us  to  remember  them  — 
let  not  wretchedness  be  seen  in  our  streets — let  France 
exhibit  to  the  world  the  glorious  example  of  expelling 
ignorance  and  misery  together. 

"Let  these,  my  virtuous  colleagues  !  be  the  subject  of 
our  care,  that,  when  we  return  among  our  fellow-citizens, 
they  may  say,  Worthy  representatives !  you  have  done 
well.  You  have  done  justice  and  honor  to  our  brave 
defenders.  You  have  encouraged  agriculture — cherished 
our  decayed  manufactures — given  new  life  to  commerce^ 
and  employment  to  our  people.  You  have  rem,ozfed  from 
our  coufitry  the  reproach  of  forgetting  the  poor — you  have 
caused  the  cry  of  the  orphan  to  cease — you  have  wiped 
the  tear  from  the  eye  of  the  suffering  mother — you  have 
given  comfort  to  the  aged  and  imfirm — you  have  pene- 
trated into  the  gloomy  recesses  of  wretchedness.^  and  have 
banished  it.  Welcome  among  us.,  ye  brave  and  virtuous 
representatives !  and  ?fiay  your  example  be  followed  by 
your  .successors  ! ' ' 

THOMAS  PAINE. 
Paris.,  i79y. 


ORIGIN  OF  FREE-MASONRY. 


IT  is  always  understood  that  Free-Masons  have  a 
secret  which  they  carefully  conceal ;  but,  from  every- 
thing that  can  be  collected  from  their  own  accounts 
of  Masonry,  their  real  secret  is  no  other  than  their  origin, 
which  but  few  of  them  understand  ;  and  those  who  do, 
envelope  it  in  mystery. 

The  Society  of  Masons  are  distinguished  into  three 
classes  or  degrees,  ist.  The  Entered  Apprentice.  2nd. 
The  Fellow-Craft.     3rd.  The  Master  Mason. 

The  entered  apprentice  knows  but  little  more  of 
Masonry  than  the  use  of  signs  and  tokens,  and  certain 
steps  and  words,  by  which  Masons  can  recognize  each 
other,  without  being  discovered  by  a  person  who  is  not 
a  Mason.  The  fellow-craft  is  not  much  better  instructed 
in  Masonrv-  than  the  entered  apprentice.  It  is  only  in 
the  master  mason's  lodge  that  whatever  knowledge 
remains  of  the  origin  of  Masonr>'  is  preserved  and  con- 
cealed. 

In  1730,  Samuel  Pritchard,  member  of  a  constituted 
lodge  in  England,  published  a  treatise  entitled  Masonry 
Dissected ;  and  made  oath  before  the  lord  mayor  of 
London,  that  it  was  a  true  copy. 

"Samuel  Pritchard  maketh  oath  that  the  copy  here- 
imto  annexed  is  a  true  and  genuine  copy  in  every  par- 
ticular.'' 

In  his  work  he  has  given  the  catechism,  or  examina- 
tion, in  question  and  answer,  of  the  apprentices,  the 
fellow-craft,  and  the  master  mason.  There  was  no 
difficulty  in  doing  this,  as  it  is  mere  form. 


322  AGR   OF   REASON. 

In  his  introduction  he  says,  "The  original  institution 
of  Masonry  consisted  in  the  foundation  of  the  liberal  arts 
and  sciences,  but  more  especially  in  geometry,  for  at  the 
building  of  the  Tower  of  Babel,  the  art  and  mystery  of 
Masonry  was  first  introduced,  and  from  thence  handed 
down  by  Euclid,  a  worthy  and  excellent  mathematician 
of  the  Egyptians ;  and  he  communicated  it  to  Hiram, 
the  Master  Mason  concerned  in  building  Solomon's 
Temple  in  Jerusalem. ' ' 

Besides  the  absurdity  of  deriving  Masonry  from  the 
building  of  Babel,  where,  according  to  the  story,  the 
confusion  of  languages  prevented  the  builders  under- 
standing each  other,  and  consequently  of  communicating^ 
any  knowledge  they  had,  there  is  a  glaring  contradiction, 
in  point  of  chronology  in  the  account  he  gives. 

Solomon's  Temple  was  built  and  dedicated  1004  years 
before  the  Christian  era ;  and  Euclid,  as  may  be  seen  in 
the  tables  of  chronology,  lived  277  years  before  the  same 
era.  It  was  therefore  impossible  that  Euclid  could  com- 
municate any  thing  to  Hiram,  since  Euclid  did  not  live 
till  700  years  after  the  time  of  Hiram. 

In  1783,  Captain  George  Smith,  inspector  of  the  Royal 
Artillery  Academy  at  Woolwich,  in  England,  and  Pro- 
vincial Grand  Master  of  Masonry  for  the  county  of  Kent, 
published  a  treatise  entitled,  The  Use  and  Abuse  of  Free- 
Masonry. 

In  his  chapter  on  the  antiquity  of  Masonry,  he  makes 
it  to  be  coeval  with  creation,  "when,"  says  he,  "the 
sovereign  Architect  raised  on  Masonic  principles  the 
beauteous  globe,  and  commanded  that  master  science, 
geometry,  to  lay  the  planetary  world,  and  to  regulate  by 
its  laws  the  whole  stupendous  system  in  just  unerring 
proportion,  rolling  round  the  central  sun." 

"But,"  continues  he,  "I  am  not  at  liberty  publicly  to 
undraw  the  curtain,  and  thereby  to  descant  on  this  head  : 
jt  is  sacred,   and  will  ever  remain  so;    those  who  are 


AGE  OF   REASON'.  323 

lionored  with  the  trust  will  not  reveal  it,  and  those  who 
are  ignorant  of  it  cannot  betray  it."  By  this  last  part 
of  the  phrase,  Smith  means  the  two  inferior  classes,  the 
fellow-craft  and  the  entered  apprentice ;  for  he  says,  in 
the  next  page  of  his  work,  "It  is  not  ever>'  one  that  is 
barely  initiated  into  Free-Masonry  that  is  entrusted  with 
all  the  mysteries  thereto  belonging ;  they  are  not  attain- 
able as  things  of  course,  nor  by  ever>'  capacity." 

The  learned,  but  unfortunate  Doctor  Dodd,  Grand 
Chaplain  of  Masonry-,  in  his  oration  at  the  dedication  of 
Free-Masons' -Hall,  London,  traces  Masonry  through  a 
variety  of  stages.  Masons,  says  he,  are  well-informed 
from  their  own  private  and  interior  records,  that  the 
iDuilding  of  Solomon's  Temple  is  an  important  era,  from 
whence  they  derive  many  mysteries  of  their  art.  "Now, 
(says  he),  be  it  remembered  that  this  great  event  took 
place  above  1000  years  before  the  Christian  era,  and  con- 
sequently more  than  a  centur}'  before  Homer,  the  first  of 
the  Grecian  poets,  wrote  ;  and  above  five  centuries  before 
Pythagoras  brought  from  the  east  his  sublime  system  of 
truly  Masonic  instruction  to  illuminate  our  western 
world. 

"But  remote  as  this  period  is,  we  date  not  from  thence 
the  commencement  of  our  art.  For  though  it  might  owe 
to  the  wise  and  glorious  king  of  Israel,  some  of  its  many 
mystic  forms  and  hieroglyphic  ceremonies,  yet  certainly 
the  art  itself  is  coeval  with  man,  the  great  subject  of  it. 

"We  trace,"  continues  he,  "its  footsteps  in  the  most 
distant,  the  most  remote  ages  and  nations  of  the  world. 
We  find  it  amongst  the  first  and  most  celebrated  civilizers 
of  the  east.  We  deduce  it  regularly  from  the  first  astron- 
omers on  the  plains  of  Chaldea,  to  the  wise  and  mystic 
kings  and  priests  of  Egypt,  the  sages  of  Greece,  and 
the  philosophers  of  Rome." 

From  these  reports  and  declarations  of  Masons  of  the 
highest  order  in  the  institution,   we  see  that  Masonry, 


324  AGE   OF   REASOX. 

without  publicly  declaring  so,  lays  claim  to  some  divine 
communication  from  the  Creator,  in  a  manner  different 
from  and  unconnected  with  the  book  which  the  Christians 
call  the  Bible  ;  and  the  natural  result  from  this  is,  that 
Masonry  is  derived  from  some  ver^'  ancient  religion, 
wholly  independent  of  and  unconnected  with  that  book. 

To  come  then  at  once  to  the  point,  Masonry  (as  I  shall 
show  from  the  customs,  ceremonies,  hieroglyphics,  and 
chronolog}'  of  Masonry)  is  derived,  and  is  the  remains  of 
the  religion  of  the  ancient  Druids ;  who,  like  the  magi 
of  Persia,  and  the  priests  of  Heliopolis  in  Eg>'pt,  were 
priests  of  the  sun.  They  paid  worship  to  this  great 
luminary,  as  the  great  visible  agent  of  a  great  invisible 
first  cause,  whom  they  styled.  Time  without  limits. 

The  Christian  religion  and  Masonry  have  one  and  the 
same  common  origin,  both  are  derived  from  the  worship 
of  the  sun ;  the  difference  between  their  origin  is,  that 
the  Christian  religion  is  a  parody  on  the  worship  of  the 
sun,  in  which  they  put  a  man  whom  they  call  Christ  in 
the  place  of  the  sun,  and  pay  him  the  same  adoration 
which  was  originally  paid  to  the  sun,  as  I  have  shown  in 
the  chapter  on  the  origin  of  the  Christian  religion.  * 

In  Masonry  many  of  the  ceremonies  of  the  Druids  are 
preserved  in  their  original  state,  at  least  without  any 
parody.  With  them  the  sun  is  still  the  sun ;  and  his 
image  in  the  form  of  the  sun,  is  the  great  emblematical 
ornament  of  Masonic  lodges  and  Masonic  dresses.  It  is 
the  central  figure  on  their  aprons,  and  they  wear  it  also 
pendant  on  the  breast  in  their  lodges,  and  in  their  pro- 
cessions. It  has  the  figure  of  a  man,  as  at  the  head  of 
the  sun,  as  Christ  is  always  represented. 

At  what  period  of  antiquity,  or  in  what  nation,  this 
religion  was  first  established,  is  lost  in  the  labyrinth  of 
unrecorded  times.  It  is  generally  ascribed  to  the  ancient 
Egyptians,  the  Babylonians  and  Chaldeans,  and  reduced 

*  Not  published. 


AGE  OF  REASON,  325 

afterwards  to  a  system  regulated  by  the  apparent  progress 
of  the  sun  through  the  twelve  signs  of  the  zodiac  by 
Zoroaster  the  lawgiver  of  Persia,  from  whence  Pythag- 
oras brought  it  into  Greece.  It  is  to  these  matters  Dr. 
Dodd  refers  in  the  passage  already  quoted  from  his 
oration. 

The  worship  of  the  sun,  as  the  great  visible  agent  of 
a  great  invisible  first  cause,  time  without  limits,  spread 
itself  over  a  considerable  part  of  Asia  and  Africa,  from 
thence  to  Greece  and  Rome,  through  all  ancient  Gaul, 
and  into  Britain  and  Ireland. 

Smith,  in  his  chapter  on  the  antiquity  of  Masonry  in 
Britain,  says,  that  "  notwithstanding  the  obscurity  which 
envelopes  Masonic  history  in  that  country,  various  cir- 
cumstances contribute  to  prove  that  Free-Masonr>'  was 
introduced  into  Britain  about  1030  years  before  Christ." 

It  cannot  be  Masonr>'  in  its  present  state  that  Smith 
here  alludes  to.  The  Druids  flourished  in  Britain  at  the 
period  he  speaks  of,  and  it  is  from  them  that  Masonry  is 
descended.  Smith  has  put  the  child  in  the  place  of  the 
parent. 

It  sometimes  happens,  as  well  in  writing  as  in  conver- 
sation, that  a  person  lets  slip  an  expression  that  serves  to 
unravel  what  he  intends  to  conceal,  and  this  is  the  case 
with  Smith,  for  in  the  same  chapter  he  says:  "The 
Druids,  when  they  committed  any  thing  to  writing,  used 
the  Greek  alphabet,  and  I  am  bold  to  assert  that  the 
most  perfect  remains  of  the  Druids'  rites  and  ceremonies 
are  preserved  in  the  customs  and  ceremonies  of  the 
Masons  that  are  to  be  found  existing  among  mankind. 
My  brethren,"  says  he,  "may  be  able  to  trace  them  with 
greater  exactness  than  I  am  at  liberty  to  explain  to  the 
public." 

This  is  a  confession  from  a  Master  Mason,  without 
intending  it  to  be  so  understood  by  the  public,  that 
Masonry  is  the  remains  of  the  religion  of  the  Druids. 


326  AGE   OF   REASON. 

The  reason  for  the  Masons  keeping  this  a  secret  I  shall 
explain  in  the  course  of  this  work. 

As  the  study  and  contemplation  of  the  Creator  in  the 
works  of  the  creation,  of  which  the  sun,  as  the  great 
visible  agent  of  that  Being,  was  the  visible  object  of  the 
adoration  of  Druids,  all  their  religious  rites  and  cere- 
monies had  reference  to  the  apparent  progress  of  the  sun 
through  the  twelve  signs  of  the  zodiac,  and  his  influence 
upon  the  earth.  The  Masons  adopt  the  same  practices. 
The  roof  of  their  temples  or  lodges  is  ornamented  with  a 
sun,  and  the  floor  is  a  representation  of  the  variegated 
face  of  the  earth,  either  by  carpeting  or  Mosaic  work. 

Free-Masons'  Hall,  in  Great  Queen-street,  Lincoln's 
Inn  Fields,  London,  is  a  magnificent  building,  and  cost 
upwards  of  12,000  pounds  sterling.  Smith,  in  speaking 
of  this  building,  says,  (page  152,)  "The  roof  of  this 
magnificent  hall  is,  in  all  probability,  the  highest  piece 
of  furnished  architecture  in  Europe.  In  the  centre  of 
this  roof,  a  most  resplendent  sun  is  represented  in  bur- 
nished gold,  surrounded  with  the  twelve  signs  of  the 
zodiac,  with  their  respective  characters : 

Hf^  Aries,  j*j   Libra, 

M  Taurus,  ^  Scorpio, 

M   Gemini,  ^    Sagittarius, 

*^  Cancer,  k^  Capricomus, 

^  Leo,  ^   Aquarius, 

^■-   Virgo,  ^   Pisces." 

After  giving  this  description,  he  says,  ' '  The  emblem- 
atical meaning  of  the  sun  is  well  known  to  the  enlight- 
ened and  inquisitive  Free-Mason  ;  and  as  the  real  sun  is 
situated  in  the  centre  of  the  universe,  so  the  emblematical 
sun  is  the  centre  of  real  Masonry.  We  all  know," 
continues  he,  "that  the  sun  is  the  fountain  of  light,  the 
source  of  the  seasons,  the  cause  of  the  vicissitudes  of  day 


AGE   OF    REASON.  327 

and  nio^ht,  the  parent  of  vegetation,  the  friend  of  man  ; 
hence  the  scientific  Free-Mason  only  knows  the  reason 
why  the  sun  is  placed  in  the  centre  of  this  beautiful  hall." 

The  Masons,  in  order  to  protect  themselves  from  the 
persecution  of  the  Christian  church,  have  always  spoken 
in  a  mystical  manner  of  the  figure  of  the  sun  in  their 
lodges,  or,  like  the  astronomer  Lalande,  who  is  a  Mason, 
been  silent  upon  the  subject.  It  is  their  secret,  especially 
in  Catholic  countries,  because  the  figure  of  the  sun  is  the 
expressive  criterion  that  denotes  they  are  descended  from 
the  Druids,  and  that  wise,  elegant,  philosophical  religion, 
was  the  faith  opposite  to  the  faith  of  the  gloomy  Christian 
church. 

The  lodges  of  the  Masons,  if  built  for  the  purpose,  are 
constructed  in  a  manner  to  correspond  with  the  apparent 
motion  of  the  sun.  They  are  situated  East  and  West. 
The  master's  place  is  always  in  the  East.  In  the  examina- 
tion of  an  entered  apprentice,  the  master,  among  many 
other  questions,  asks  him  : — 

Q.   How  is  the  lodge  situated? 

A.  East  and  West. 

Q.  Why  so  ? 

A.  Because  all  churches  and  chapels  are  or  ought  to 
be  so. 

This  answer,  which  is  mere  catechismal  form,  is  not 
an  answer  to  the  question.  It  does  no  more  than  remove 
the  question  a  point  further,  which  is.  Why  ought  all 
churches  and  chapels  to  be  so?  But  as  the  entered 
apprentice  is  not  initiated  into  the  Druidical  mysteries  of 
Masonry,  he  is  not  asked  any  questions  to  which  a  direct 
answer  would  lead  thereto. 

Q.  Where  stands  your  master? 

A.  In  the  East. 

Q.   Why  so? 

A.  As  the  sun  rises  in  the  East,  and  opens  the  day,  so 
the  master  stands  in  the  East,  (with  his  right  hand  upon 


328  AGE   OF   RKASON. 

his  left  breast,  being  a  sign,  and  the  square  about  his 
neck,)  to  open  the  lodge,  and  set  his  men  at  work. 

Q.  Where  stands  your  wardens? 

A.   In  the  West. 

Q.  What  is  their  business? 

A.  As  the  sun  sets  in  the  West  to  close  the  day,  so  the 
wardens  stand  in  the  West  (with  their  right  hands  upon 
their  left  breasts,  being  a  sign,  and  the  level  and  plumb 
rule  about  their  necks, )  to  close  the  lodge,  and  dismiss 
the  men  from  labor,  paying  them  their  wages. 

Here  the  name  of  the  sun  is  mentioned,  but  it  is  proper 
to  observe,  that  in  this  place  it  has  reference  only  to 
labor  or  to  the  time  of  labor,  and  not  to  any  religious 
Druidical  rite  or  ceremony,  as  it  would  have  with  respect 
to  the  situation  of  lodges  East  and  West.  I  have  already 
observed  in  the  chapter  on  the  origin  of  the  Christian 
religion,  that  the  situation  of  churches  East  and  West  is 
taken  from  the  worship  of  the  sun,  which  rises  in  the 
east,  and  has  not  the  least  reference  to  the  person  called 
Jesus  Christ.  The  Christians  never  bury  their  dead  on  the 
north  side  of  a  church  ;  and  a  Mason's  lodge  always  has,  or 
is  supposed  to  have,  three  windows,  which  are  called  fixed 
lights,  to  distinguish  them  from  the  moveable  lights  of 
the  sun  and  the  moon.  The  master  asks  the  entered 
apprentice, 

Q.   How  are  they  (the  fixed  lights)  situated? 

A.  East,  West,  and  South. 

Q.  What  are  their  uses? 

A.  To  light  the  men  to  and  from  their  work. 

Q.  Why  are  there  no  lights  in  the  North? 

A.   Because  the  sun  darts  no  rays  from  thence. 

This,  among  numerous  other  instances,  shows  that 
the  Christian  religion,  and  Masonry,  have  one  and  the 
same  common  origin,  —  the  ancient  worship  of  the  sun. 

The  high  festival  of  the  Masons  is  on  the  day  they  call 
St.  John's  day  ;  but  every  enlightened  Mason  must  know 


AGE   OF   REASON.  339 

that  holding  their  festival  on  this  day  has  no  reference  to 
the  person  called  St.  John  ;  and  that  it  is  only  to  disguise 
the  true  cause  of  holding  it  on  this  day  that  they  call  the 
day  by  that  name.  As  there  were  Masons,  or  at  least 
Dniids,  many  centuries  before  the  time  of  St.  John,  if 
such  person  ever  existed,  the  holding  their  festival  on 
this  day  must  refer  to  some  cause  totally  unconnected 
with  John. 

The  case  is,  that  the  day  called  St.  John's  day  is  the 
24th  of  June,  and  is  what  is  called  Midsummer-day. 
The  sun  is  then  arrived  at  the  summer  solstice ;  and 
with  respect  to  his  meridional  altitude,  or  height  at  high 
noon,  a'ppears  for  some  days  to  be  of  the  same  height. 
The  astronomical  longest  day,  like  the  shortest  day,  is 
not,  every  year,  on  account  of  leap-year,  on  the  same 
numerical  day,  and  therefore  the  24th  of  June  is  always 
taken  for  Midsummer-day  ;  and  it  is  in  honor  of  the  sun, 
which  has  then  arrived  at  his  greatest  height  in  our 
hemisphere,  and  not  any  thing  with  respect  to  St.  John, 
that  this  annual  festival  of  the  Masons,  taken  from  the 
Druids,  is  celebrated  on  Midsummer-day. 

Customs  will  often  outlive  the  remembrance  of  their 
origin,  and  this  is  the  case  with  respect  to  a  custom  still 
practised  in  Ireland,  where  the  Druids  flourished  at  the 
time  they  flourished  in  Britain.  On  the  eve  of  St.  John's 
day,  that  is,  on  the  eve  of  Midsummef-day,  the  Irish 
light  fires  on  the  tops  of  the  hills.  This  can  have  no 
reference  to  St.  John,  but  it  has  emblematical  reference 
to  the  sun,  which  on  that  day  is  at  his  highest  summer 
elevation,  and  might  in  common  language  be  said  to 
have  arrived  at  the  top  of  the  hill. 

As  to  what  Masons,  and  books  of  Masonry,  tell  us  of 
Solomon's  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  it  is  no  wise  improbable 
that  some  Masonic  ceremonies  may  have  been  derived 
from  the  building  of  that  temple,  for  the  worship  of  the 
sun  was  in  practice  many  centuries  before  the  temple 


330  AGE   OF   REASON. 

existed,  or  before  the  Israelites  came  out  of  Egypt.  And 
we  learn  from  the  history  of  the  Jewish  kings,  2  Kings, 
chap,  xxii,  xxiii,  that  the  worship  of  the  sun  was  per- 
formed by  the  Jews  in  that  temple.  It  is,  however,  much 
to  be  doubted,  if  it  was  done  with  the  same  scientific 
purity  and  religious  morality  with  which  it  was  performed 
by  the  Druids,  who,  by  all  accounts  that  historically 
remain  of  them,  were  a  wise,  learned,  and  moral  class 
of  men.  The  Jews,  on  the  contrary,  were  ignorant  of 
astronomy,  and  of  science  in  general ;  and  if  a  religion 
founded  upon  astronomy  fell  into  their  hands,  it  is 
almost  certain  it  would  be  corrupted.  We  do  not  read 
in  the  history  of  the  Jews,  whether  in  the  Bible  or  else- 
where, that  they  were  the  inventors  or  the  improvers  of 
any  one  art  or  science.  Even  in  the  building  of  this 
temple,  the  Jews  did  not  know  how  to  square  and  frame 
the  timber  for  beginning  and  carrying  on  the  work,  and 
Solomon  was  obliged  to  send  to  Hiram,  king  of  Tyre, 
(Sidon,)  to  procure  workmen  ;  "for  thou  knowest,  (says 
Solomon  to  Hiram,  i  Kings,  chap,  v,  ver.  6,)  that  there 
is  not  among  us  any  that  can  skill  to  hew  timber  like 
unto  the  Sidonians."  This  temple  was  more  properly 
Hiram's  temple  than  Solomon's ;  and  if  the  Masons 
derive  any  thing  from  the  building  of  it,  they  owe  it  to 
the  Sidonians  and  not  to  the  Jews.  —  But  to  return  to  the 
worship  of  the  aun  in  this  temple. 

•  It  is  said,  2  Kings,  chap,  xxiii,  ver.  5,  "And  King 
Josiah  put  down  all  the  idolatrous  priests  that  burned 
incense  unto  the  sun,  the  moon,  the  planets,  and  to  all 
the  host  of  heaven." — And  it  is  said  at  the  nth  verse, 
"And  he  took  away  the  horses  that  the  kings  of  Judah 
had  given  to  the  sun,  at  the  entering  in  of  the  house  of 
the  Lord,  and  burned  the  chariots  of  the  sun  with  fire." 
Ver.  13,  "And  the  high  places  that  were  before  Jerusa- 
lem, which  were  on  the  right  hand  of  the  mount  of 
corruption,  which  Solomon  the  king  of  Israel  had  builded 


AGE  OF    REASON.  331 

for  Ashtoreth,   the  abomination  of  the  Zidonians,  (the 
very  people  that  built  the  temple,)  did  the  king  defile." 

Besides  these  things,  the  description  that  Josephus 
g^ves  of  the  decorations  of  this  temple,  resembles  on  a 
large  scale  those  of  a  Mason's  Lodge.  He  says  that  the 
distribution  of  the  several  parts  of  the  temple  of  the  Jews 
represented  all  nature,  particularly  the  parts  most  ap- 
parent of  it,  as  the  sun,  the  moon,  the  planets,  the  zodiac,, 
the  earth,  the  elements  ;  and  that  the  system  of  the  world 
was  retraced  there  by  numerous  ingenious  emblems. 
These,  in  all  probability,  are  what  Josiah,  in  his  ignorance, 
calls  the  abominations  of  the  Zidonians.*  Every  thing, 
however,  drawn  from  this  temple, t  and  applied  to 
Masonry,  still  refers  to  the  worship  of  the  sun,  however 
corrupted  or  misunderstood  by  the  Jews,  and,  conse- 
quently, to  the  religion  of  the  Druids. 

Another  circumstance  which  shows  that  Masonry  is  de- 
rived from  some  ancient  system,  prior  to,  and  unconnected 
with  the  Christian  religion,  is  the  chronology,  or  method 
of  counting  time,  used  by  the  Masons  in  the  records  of 
their  lodges.  They  make  no  use  of  what  is  called  the 
Christian  era  ;  and  they  reckon  their  months  numerical- 
ly, as  the  ancient  Egyptians  did,  and  as  the  Quakers  do 
now.  I  have  by  me  a  record  of  a  French  lodge,  at  the 
time  the  late  Duke  of  Orleans,  then  Duke  de  Chartres, 
was  Grand  Master  of  Masonr>'  in  France.  It  begins  as 
follows :  "Z^  trentieme  jour  du  sixivme  mots  de  P  an  de 
la  V.  L.  cinq  mil  sept  cent  soixante-treize ;'*''  that  is,  the 
thirteenth  day  of  the  sixth  month  of  the  year  of  the 
Venerable    Lodge,    five   thousand    seven   hundred   and 

*  Smith,  in  speaking  o(  a  lodRC,  says,  "  Whi-n  the  lodge  is  revealed  to  an  entering 
Mason,  it  discovers  to  him  representat'.on  of  the  world ;  in  which,  from  the  wonders 
of  nature,  we  are  led  to  coniempUte  her  great  Original,  and  worship  him  from  his 
mighty  works;  and  we  are  thereby  also  moved  to  exercise  those  moral  and  social 
virtues  whicli  become  mankind  as  the  servants  of  the  great  Architect  of  the  world." 

t  It  may  not  be  iin|)roper  here  to  observe,  that  the  law  called  the  law  of  Moses  could 
not  have  been  in  existence  at  the  time  of  building  this  temple.  Here  is  the  likeness  of 
things  in  heaven  above,  and  in  the  earth  beneath.  And  werea<l  in  ist  Kings,  chap,  vi, 
vii  ,  that  Solomon  made  cherubs  and  cheriibims,  that  he  carved  all  the  walls  of  the 
house  round  about  with  cherubiins  and  palm-trees,  and  ot)eii  flowers;  and  that  he 
made  a  molten  sea.  placed  on  twelve  oxen  and  the  ledges  of  it  were  ornamented  with 
lions,  oxen,  and  cherubims ;  all  this  is  contrary  to  the  law,  called  the  law  of  Moses. 


332  AGE  OF   REASON. 

seventy-three.  By  what  I  observe  in  English  books  of 
Masonry,  the  English  Masons  use  initials  A.  L. ,  and  not 
V.  L.  By  A.  L. ,  they  mean  in  the  year  of  the  Lodge,  as 
the  Christians  by  A.  D.  mean  in  the  year  of  our  Lord. 
But  A.  L.,  like  V.  L.,  refers  to  the  same  chronological 
era,  that  is,  to  the  supposed  time  of  the  creation.  In  the 
chapter  on  the  origin  of  the  Christian  religion,  1  have 
shown  that  the  cosmogony,  that  is,  the  account  of  the 
creation,  with  which  the  book  of  Genesis  opens,  has  been 
taken  and  mutilated  from  the  Zend- Avista  of  Zoroaster, 
and  is  fixed  as  a  preface  to  the  Bible,  after  the  Jews 
returned  from  captivity  in  Babylon  :  and  that  the  rabbins 
of  the  Jews  do  not  hold  their  account  in  Genesis  to  be  a 
fact,  but  mere  allegor\'.  The  six  thousand  years  in  the 
Zend-Avista,  is  changed  or  interpolated  into  six  days  in 
the  account  of  Genesis.  The  Masons  appear  to  have 
chosen  the  same  period,  and,  perhaps  to  avoid  the 
suspicion  and  persecution  of  the  church,  have  adopted 
the  era  of  the  world,  as  the  era  of  Masonry.  The  V.  L. , 
of  the  French,  and  A.  L.  of  the  English  Mason,  answer 
to  the  A.  M.,  Anno  Mundi,  or  year  of  the  world. 

Though  the  Masons  have  taken  many  of  their  ceremo- 
nies and  hieroglyphics  from  the  ancient  Egyptians,  it  is 
certain  they  have  not  taken  their  chronology  from  thence. 
If  they  had,  the  church  would  soon  have  sent  them  to 
the  stake  ;  as  the  chronology  of  the  Eg>'ptians,  like  that 
of  the  Chinese,  goes  many  thousand  years  beyond  the 
Bible  chronology. 

The  religion  of  the  Druids,  as  before  said,  w^as  the 
same  as  the  religion  of  the  ancient  Egyptians.  The 
priests  of  Egypt  were  the  professors  and  teachers  of 
science,  and  were  styled  priests  of  Heliopolis  ;  that  is,  of 
the  city  of  the  sun.  The  Druids  in  Europe,  who  were 
the  same  order  of  men,  have  their  name  from  the  Teu- 
tonic or  ancient  German  language,  the  Germans  being 
anciently  called  Teutones.     The  word  Druid  signifies  a 


AGE  OF   REASON.  ^^;^ 

wise  man.     In   Persia  they  were   called   Magi,   which 
signifies  the  same  thing, 

"  Egypt,"  says  Smith,  "  from  whence  we  derive  many 
of  our  mysteries,  hath  always  borne  a  distinguished  rank 
in  history,  and  was  once  celebrated  above  all  others  for 
its  antiquities,  learning,  opulence,  and  fertility.  In  their 
system,  their  principal  hero-gods,  Osiris  and  Isis,  theo- 
logically represented  the  Supreme  Being  and  universal 
nature  ;  and  physically,  the  two  great  celestial  luminaries, 
the  sun  and  the  moon,  by  whose  influence  all  nature  was 
actuated.  The  experienced  brethren  of  the  society  (says 
Smith  in  a  note  to  this  pas.sage)  are  well  informed  what 
affinity  these  symbols  bear  to  Masonr}-,  and  why  they  are 
used  in  all  Masonic  lodges." 

In  speaking  of  the  apparel  of  the  Masons  in  their 
lodges,  part  of  which,  as  we  see  in  their  public  proces- 
sions, is  a  white  leather  apron,  he  says,  "The  Druids 
were  apparelled  in  white  at  the  time  of  their  sacrifices 
and  solemn  offices.  The  Egyptian  priest  of  Osiris  wore 
snow-white  cotton.  The  Grecian  and  most  other  priests 
wore  white  garments.  As  Masons,  we  regard  the  princi- 
ples of  those  who  were  the  first  worshippers  of  the 
true  God^  imitate  their  apparel,  and  assume  the  badge  or 
innocence. 

"The  Egyptians,"  continues  Smith,  "in  the  earliest 
ages,  constituted  a  great  number  of  lodges,  but,  with 
assiduous  care,  kept  their  secrets  of  Masonry  from  all 
strangers.  These  secrets  have  been  imperfectly  handed 
down  to  us  by  tradition  only,  and  ought  to  be  kept  un- 
discovered to  the  laborers,  craftsmen,  and  apprentices, 
till,  by  good  behavior  and  long  study,  they  become 
better  acquainted  in  geometry  and  the  liberal  arts,  and 
thereby  qualified  for  masters  and  wardens,  which  is 
seldom  or  ever  "the  case  with  English  Masons." 

Under  the  head  of  Free-Masonry,  written  by  the 
astronomer    Lalande,  in    the   French    Encyclopedia,   I 


334  AGE   OF   REASON. 

expected,  from  his  great  knowledge  in  astronomy,  to 
have  found  much  information  on  the  origin  of  Masonry  ; 
for  what  connection  can  there  be  between  any  institution 
and  the  sun  and  twelve  signs  of  the  zodiac,  if  there  be 
not  something  in  that  institution,  or  in  its  origin,  that 
has  reference  to  astronomy?  Every  thing  used  as  an 
hieroglyphic  has  reference  to  the  subject  and  purpose  for 
which  it  is  used ;  and  we  are  not  to  suppose  the  Free- 
Masons,  among  whom  are  many  very  learned  and  scien- 
tific men,  to  be  such  idiots  as  to  make  use  of  astronomical 
signs  without  some  astronomical  purpose. 

But  I  was  much  disappointed  in  my  expectation  from 
Lalande.  In  speaking  of  the  origin  of  Masonry,  he  says, 
'''' V origine  de  la  Maconiere  seperd^  comme  tant  d'' autres^ 
dans  Vobscurite  des  temps ;''^  that  is,  the  origin  of 
Masonry,  like  many  others,  loses  itself  in  the  obscurity  of 
time.  When  I  came  to  this  expression,  I  supposed 
I^alande  a  Mason,  and  on  inquiry  found  he  was.  This 
passing  over  saved  him  from  the  embarrassment  which 
Masons  are  under  respecting  the  disclosure  of  their 
origin,  and  which  they  are  sworn  to  conceal.  *  There  is  a 
society  of  Masons  in  Dublin   who   take   the   name   of 

*  "  It  must  not  be  expected,"  says  Godfrey  Higgins  in  the  Anacalypsii,  (vol  i,  page 
816,)  "  that  the  grand  secret,  the  knowledge  of  the  highest  and  last  secret  of  the  initia- 
ted,—  of  tlieilluminati,—  will  be  found  clearly  described  in  any  work  written  by  one  of 
the  initiated.  If  my  reader  be,  as  I  hope  he  is,  an  honorable,  upright  and  benevolent 
man.  and  wish  to  know  the  truth,  by  working  himself  up  to  the  Royal  Arch,  he  then 
will  know  it.  More  I  add  not  here:  the  Kwinitiated  have  no  business  to  know.  To 
the  initiated  I  need  not  tell  it."  On  page  719  of  the  same  work,  this  learned  and  astute 
author  says  that  "Masons  were  the  builders  of  Solomon's  temple,"  that  "they  and 
their  art  came  from  India,"  and  that  "they  were  the  ancestors  of  our  Free-Masons," 
Speaking  of  the  initiation  of  Moses  by  the  Egyptian  priests,  Schiller  says,  "These 
ceremonies  were  connected  with  the  mysterious  images  and  hyeroglyphics.  And  the 
hidden  truths  so  carefully  concealed  under  them,  and  used  at  their  riles,  were  all  com- 
prised under  the  name,  mysteries,  such  as  had  been  used  in  the  temples  of  Isis  and 
Serapis,  which  were  the  models  of  the  mysteries  of  Eleusis  and  Samothrace,  and  in 
more  modern  times  gave  rise  to  the  order  of  Freemasonry."  "  I  doubt  not,"  continues 
Higgins,  "that  what  Mr.  Schiller  says  is  true,  with  one  exception  :  the  mysteries  were 
not  the  origin  of  Masonry ;  they  were  Masonry  itself;  for  Masonry  was  a  part  of  them, 
and  every  part,  except  that  which  my  Masonic  engagements  prevent,  I  will  explain." 

On  page  726  Mr.  Higgins  states  that  "  The  Masons  were  the  first  priests,  or  a  branch 
from  them,  and  as  they  were  the  persons  employed  to  provide  every  thing  required 
for  honoring  the  Gods,  the  building  of  temples  naturally  fell  into  their  hands,  and  thus 
priests  and  masons  were  identified.  This  was  the  first  practical  attempt  at  Masonry. 
Thus  the  Masons  were  an  order  of  priests,  that  is,  of  initiated." — Eckler. 


AGE  OF   RKASON.  335 

Druids  ;  these  Masons  must  be  supposed  to  have  a  reason 
for  taking  that  name. 

I  come  now  to  speak  of  the  cause  of  secrecy  used  by 
the  Masons. 

The  natural  source  of  secrecy  is  fear.  When  any  new 
religion  overruns  a  fonner  religion,  the  professors  of  the 
new  become  the  persecutors  of  the  old.  We  see  this  in 
all  the  instances  that  histor>'  brings  before  us.  When 
Hilkiah  the  priest  and  Shaphan  the  scribe,  in  the  reign 
of  king  Josiah,  found  or  pretended  to  find  the  law,  called 
the  law  of  Moses,  a '  thousand  years  after  the  time  of 
Moses,  (and  it  does  not  appear  from  the  2nd  book  of  Kings, 
chap,  xxii.,  xxiii.,  that  such  law  was  ever  practised 
or  known  before  the  time  of  Josiah,)  he  established  that 
law  as  a  national  religion,  and  put  all  the  priests  of  the 
sun  to  death.  When  the  Christian  religion  overran  the 
Jewish  religion,  the  Jews  were  the  continual  subjects  of 
persecution  in  all  Christian  countries.  When  the  Pro- 
testant religion  in  England  overran  the  Roman  Catholic 
religion,  it  was  made  death  for  a  Catholic  priest  to  be 
found  in  England.  As  this  has  been  the  case  in  all  the 
instances  we  have  any  knowledge  of,  we  are  obliged  to 
admit  it  with  respect  to  the  case  in  question,  and  that 
when  the  Christian  religion  overran  the  religion  of  the 
Druids  in  Italy,  ancient  Gaul,  Britain,  and  Ireland,  the 
Druids  became  the  subjects  of  persecution.  This  would 
naturally  and  necessarily  oblige  such  of  them  as  remained 
attached  to  their  original  religion  to  meet  in  secret  and 
under  the  strongest  injunctions  of  secrecy.  Their  safety 
depended  upon  it  A  false  brother  might  expose  the 
lives  of  many  of  them  to  destruction :  and  from  the 
remains  of  the  religion  of  the  Druids,  thus  preserved, 
arose  the  institution  which,  to  avoid  the  name  of  Druid, 
took  that  of  Mason,  and  practised,  under  this  new  name, 
the  rights  and  ceremonies  of  Druids. 

THOMAS  PAINE. 


EXTRACT  FROM  A  REPLY  TO  THE 

BISHOP  OF  llandaff; 

GENESIS. 

THE  bishop  says,  '  *  the  oldest  book  in  the  world  is 
Genesis."  This  is  mere  assertion;  he  offers  no 
proof  of  it,  and  I  go  to  controvert  it,  and  to  show 
that  the  book  of  Job,  which  is  not  a  Hebrew  book,  but 
is  a  book  of  the  Gentiles,  translated  into  Hebrew,  is 
much  older  than  the  book  of  Genesis. 

The  book  of  Genesis  means  the  book  of  generations ; 
to  which  are  prefixed  two  chapters,  the  first  and  second, 
which  contain  two  dijBferent  cosmogonies,  that  is,  two 
diflferent  accounts  of  the  creation  of  the  world,  written 
by  different  persons,  as  I  have  shown  in  the  preceding 
part  of  this  work. 

The  first  cosmogony  begins  at  the  first  verse  of  the  first 
chapter,  and  ends  at  the  end  of  the  third  verse  of  the 
second  chapter ;  for  the  adverbial  conjunction  thus^  with 
which  the  second  chapter  begins,  shows  those  three 
verses  to  belong  to  the  first  chapter.  The  second  cos- 
mogony begins  at  the  fourth  verse  of  the  second  chapter, 
and  ends  with  that  chapter. 

In  the  first  cosmogony  the  name  of  God  is  used  with- 
out any  epithet  joined  to  it,  and  is  repeated  thirty-five 
times.     In  the  second  cosmogony  it  is  always  the  Lord 

*  This  extract  from  Mr.  Paine's  reply  to  Watson,  Bishop  of  Llandaff,  was  given  by 
him,  not  long  before  his  death,  to  Mrs.  Palmer,  widow  of  Elihu  Palmer.  He  retained 
the  work  entire,  and,  therefore,  must  have  transcribed  this  part,  which  was  unusual 
for  him  to  do.  Mrs  Palmer  presented  it  to  the  editor  of  the  Theopkitanthropitt,  pub- 
lished in  New  York,  in  which  it  appeared  in  iSio. 


RICHARD  WATSON,  Bisli'M^  nf  riandafr. 


AGE  OF   REASON.  337 

God,  which  is  repeated  eleven  times.  These  two  differ- 
ent styles  of  expression  show  these  two  chapters  to  be 
the  work  of  two  different  persons,  and  the  contradictions 
they  contain  show  they  cannot  be  the  work  of  one  and 
the  same  person,  as  I  have  already  shown. 

The  third  chapter,  in  which  the  style  of  Lord  God,  is 
continued  in  every  instance,  except  in  the  supposed  con- 
versation between  the  woman  and  the  serpent  (for  in 
every  place  in  that  chapter  where  the  writer  speaks,  it 
is  always  the  Lord  God),  shows  this  chapter  to  belong  to 
the  second  cosmogony. 

This  chapter  gives  an  account  of  what  is  called  the 
fall  of  man,  which  is  no  other  than  a  fable  borrowed 
from  and  constructed  upon  the  religion  of  Zoroaster,  or 
the  Persians,  of  the  annual  progress  of  the  sun  through 
the  twelve  signs  of  the  zodiac.  It  is  \.\\t/all  0/  the  year, 
the  approach  and  evil  of  winter,  announced  by  the  ascen- 
sion of  the  autumnal  constellation  of  the  serpent  of  the 
zodiac,  and  not  the  moral  fall  of  man^  that  is  the  key  of 
the  allegory,  and  of  the  fable  in  Genesis  borrowed 
from  it. 

The  fall  of  man  in  Genesis  is  said  to  have  been  pro- 
duced by  eating  a  certain  fruit,  generally  taken  to  be  an 
apple.  The  fall  of  the  year  is  the  season  for  gathering 
and  eating  the  new  apples  of  that  year.  The  allegor>', 
therefore,  holds  with  respect  to  the  fruit,  which  it  would 
not  have  done  had  it  been  an  early  summer  fruit.  It 
holds  also  with  respect  to  place.  The  tree  is  said  to 
have  been  placed  in  the  midst  of  the  garden.  But  why 
in  the  midst  of  the  garden  more  than  in  any  other  place? 
The  solution  of  the  allegory  gives  the  answer  to  this 
question,  which  is,  that  the  fall  of  the  year,  when  apples 
and  other  autumnal  fruits  are  ripe,  and  when  days  and 
nights  are  of  equal  length,  is  the  mid-season  between 
summer  and  winter. 

It  holds  also  with  respect  to  clothing,  and  the  tempera- 


338  AGE   OF   REASON. 

ture  of  the  air.  It  is  said  in  Genesis,  chap,  iii.,  ver.  21, 
' '  Unto  Adam  and  his  wife  did  the  Lord  God  fnake  coats 
v/skins^  and  clothed  them.'''  But  why  are  coats  of  skins 
mentioned?  This  cannot  be  understood  as  referring  to 
any  thing  of  the  nature  of  moral  evil.  The  sohition  of 
the  allegory  gives  again  the  answer  to  this  question, 
which  is,  that  the  evil  of  winter.,  which  follows  the  fall 
of  the  year.,  fabulously  called  in  Genesis  t\\&  fall  of  man., 
makes  warm  clothing  necessary. 

But  of  these  things  I  shall  speak  fully  when  I  come  in 
another  part  to  treat  of  the  ancient  religion  of  the 
Persians,  and  compare  it  with  the  modern  religion  of  the 
New  Testament.  *  At  present,  I  shall  confine  myself  to 
the  comparative  antiquity  of  the  books  of  Genesis  and 
Job,  taking,  at  the  same  time,  whatever  I  may  find  in  my 
way  with  respect  to  the  fabulousness  of  the  book  of 
Genesis ;  for  if  what  is  called  the  fall  of  man  in  Genesis  be 
fabulous  or  allegorical,  that  which  is  called  the  redemp- 
tion in  the  New  Testament  cannot  be  a  fact.  It  is  morally 
impossible,  and  impossible  also  in  the  nature  of  things, 
that  moral  good  can  rtA&&m  physical  evil.  I  return  to  the 
bishop. 

If  Genesis  be,  as  the  bishop  asserts,  the  oldest  book  in 
the  world,  and,  consequently,  the  oldest  and  first  written 
book  of  the  Bible,  and  if  the  extraordinary  things  related 
in  it,  such  4s  the  creation  of  the  world  in  six  days,  the 
tree  of  life,  and  of  good  and  evil,  the  story  of  Eve  and 
the  talking  serpent,  the  fall  of  man  and  his  being  turned 
out  of  paradise,  were  facts,  or  even  believed  by  the  Jews 
to  be  facts,  they  would  be  referred  to  as  fundamental 
matters,  and  that  very  frequently,  in  the  books  of  the 
Bible  that  were  written  by  various  authors  afterwards ; 
whereas  there  is  not  a  book,  chapter,  or  verse  of  the 
Bible,  from  the  time  Moses  is  said  to  have  written  the 
book  of  Genesis,  to  the  book  of  Malachi,  the  last  book 

*  Not  published. 


AGE  OF   REASON.  339 

in  the  Bible,  including  a  space  of  more  than  a  thousand 
years,  in  which  there  is  any  mention  made  of  these  things 
or  any  of  them,  nor  are  they  so  much  as  alluded  to. 
How  will  the  bishop  solve  this  difficulty,  which  stands 
as  a  circumstantial  contradiction  to  his  assertion? 

There  are  but  two  ways  of  solving  it. 

Firsts  that  the  book  of  Genesis  is  not  an  ancient  book  ; 
that  it  has  been  written  by  some  (now)  unknown  person, 
after  the  return  of  the  Jews  from  the  Babylonian  captiv- 
ity, about  a  thousand  years  after  the  time  that  Moses  is 
said  to  have  lived,  and  put  as  a  preface  or  introduction 
to  the  other  books,  when  they  were  formed  into  a  canon 
in  the  time  of  the  second  temple,  and,  therefore,  not 
having  existed  before  that  time,  none  of  these  things 
mentioned  in  it  could  be  referred  to  in  those  books. 

Secondly^  that  admitting  Genesis  to  have  been  written 
by  Moses,  the  Jews  did  not  believe  the  things  stated  in 
it  to  be  true,  and,  therefore,  as  they  could  not  refer  to 
them  as  facts,  they  would  not  refer  to  them  as  fables. 
The  first  of  these  solutions  goes  against  the  antiquity  of 
the  book,  and  the  second  against  its  authenticity,  and 
the  bishop  may  take  which  he  pleases. 

But  be  the  author  of  Genesis  whoever  he  may,  there  is 
abundant  evidence  to  show,  as  well  from  the  early 
Christian  writers,  as  from  the  Jews  themselves,  that  the 
things  stated  in  that  book  were  not  believed  to  be  facts. 
Why  they  have  been  believed  as  facts  since  that  time, 
when  better  and  fuller  knowledge  existed  on  the  case 
than  is  known  now,  can  be  accounted  for  only  on  the 
imposition  of  priestcraft. 

Augustine,  one  of  the  early  champions  of  the  Christian 
church,  acknowledges,  in  his  City  ofGod^  that  the  adven- 
ture of  Eve  and  the  serpent,  and  the  account  of  Paradise, 
were  generally  considered  as  fiction  or  allegory.  He 
regards  them  as  allegory  himself,  without  attempting 
to  give  any  explanation,  but  he  suppases  that  a  better 


340  AGE   OF   REASON. 

explanation  might  be  found  than  those  that  had  been 
offered. 

Origen,  another  early  champion  of  the  church,  says, 
*'What  man  of  good  sense  can  ever  persuade  himself 
that  there  were  a  first,  a  second,  and  a  third  day,  and  that 
each  of  these  days  had  a  night,  when  there  were  yet 
neither  sun,  moon,  nor  stars?  What  man  can  be  stupid 
enough  to  believe  that  God,  acting  the  part  of  a  gardener, 
had  planted  a  garden  in  the  east,  that  the  tree  of  life  was 
a  real  tree,  and  that  its  fruit  had  the  virtue  of  making 
those  who  eat  of  it  live  for  ever?  " 

Maimonides,  one  of  the  most  learned  and  celebrated  of 
the  Jewish  rabbins,  who  lived  in  the  eleventh  century 
(about  seven  or  eight  hundred  years  ago)  and  to  whom 
the  bishop  refers  in  his  answer  to  me,  is  very  explicit,  in 
his  book  entitled  More  Nebachim^  upon  the  non-reality 
of  the  things  stated  in  the  account  of  the  Creation  in  the 
book  of  Genesis. 

"We  ought  not"  says  he  "to  understand,  nor  take  ac- 
cording to  the  letter,  that  which  is  written  in  the  book 
of  the  Creation,  nor  to  have  the  same  ideas  of  it  with 
common  men  ;  otherwise,  our  ancient  sages,  would  not 
have  recommended,  with  so  much  care,  to  conceal  the 
sense  of  it,  and  not  to  raise  the  allegorical  veil  which 
envelopes  the  truths  it  contains.  The  book  of  Genesis, 
taken  according  to  the  letter,  gives  the  most  absurd  and 
the  most  extravagant  ideas  of  the  Divinity.  Whoever 
shall  find  out  the  sense  of  it  ought  to  restrain  himself 
from  divulging  it.  It  is  a  maxim  which  all  our  sages 
repeat,  and  above  all  with  respect  to  the  work  of  six  days. 
It  may  happen  that  some  one,  with  the  aid  he  may 
borrow  from  others,  may  hit  upon  the  meaning  of  it.  In 
that  case,  he  ought  to  impose  silence  upon  himself;  or  if 
he  speak  of  it,  he  ought  to  speak  obscurely,  and  in  an 
enigTuatical  manner,  as  I  do  myself,  leaving  the  rest  to 
be  found  out  by  those  who  can  understand." 


AGE  OF  REASON.  34I 

This  is,  certainly,  a  very  extraordinary  declaration  of 
Mainionides,  taking  all  the  parts  of  it. 

Firsts  he  declares,  that  the  account  of  the  Creation  in 
the  book  of  Genesis  is  not  a  fact ;  that  to  believe  it  to  be 
a  fact,  gives  the  most  absurd  and  the  most  extravagant 
ideas  of  the  Divinity. 

Secondly^  that  it  is  an  allegory. 

Thirdly y  that  the  allegory  has  a  concealed  secret. 

Fourthly^  that  whoever  can  find  the  secret  ought  not 
to  tell  it. 

It  is  this  last  part  that  is  the  most  extraordinary. 
Why  all  this  cape  of  the  Jewish  rabbins,  to  prevent  what 
they  call  the  concealed  meaning,  or  the  secret,  from 
being  known,  and,  if  known,  to  prevent  any  of  their 
people  from  telling  it?  It  certainly  must  be  something 
which  the  Jewish  nation  are  afraid  or  ashamed  the  world 
should  know.  It  must  be  something  personal  to  them 
as  a  people,  and  not  a  secret  of  a  divine  nature,  which 
the  more  it  is  known,  the  more  it  increases  the  glory  of 
the  Creator,  and  the  gratitude  and  happiness  of  man.  It 
is  not  God's  secret,  but  their  own,  they  are  keeping.  I 
go  to  unveil  the  secret. 

The  case  is,  the  Jews  have  stolen  their  cosmogony, 
that  is,  their  account  of  the  Creation,  from  the  cosmogony 
of  the  Persians,  contained  in  the  books  of  Zoroaster,  the 
Persian  lawgiver,  and  brought  it  with  them  when  they 
returned  from  captivity  by  the  benevolence  of  Cyrus, 
king  of  Persia  ;  for  it  is  evident,  from  the  silence  of  all 
the  books  of  the  Bible  upon  the  subject  of  the  Creation, 
that  the  Jews  had  no  cosmogony  before  that  time.  If 
they  had  a  cosmogony  from  the  time  of  Moses,  some 
of  their  judges  who  governed  during  more  than  four 
hundred  years,  or  of  their  kings,  the  Davids  and  Solomons 
of  their  day,  who  governed  nearly  five  hundred  years,  or 
of  their  prophets  and  psalmists,  who  lived  in  the  mean 
time,  would  have  mentioned  it.     It  would,  either  as  fact 


342  AGE   OF   REASON. 

or  fable,  have  been  the  grandest  of  all  subjects  for  a  psalm. 
It  would  have  suited  to  a  tittle  the  ranting,  poetical 
genius  of  Isaiah,  or  served  as  a  cordial  to  the  gloomy 
Jeremiah.  But  not  one  word,  nor  even  a  whisper,  does 
any  of  the  Bible  authors  give  upon  the  subject. 

To  conceal  the  theft,  the  rabbins  of  the  second  temple 
have  published  Genesis  as  a  book  of  Moses,  and  have 
enjoined  secresy  to  all  their  people,  who,  by  travelling 
or  otherwise,  might  happen  to  discover  from  whence  the 
cosmogony  was  borrowed,  not  to  tell  it.  The  evidence 
of  circumstances  is  often  unanswerable,  and  there  is  no 
other  than  this  which  I  have  given  that  goes  to  the 
whole  of  the  case,  and  this  does. 

Diogenes  Laertius,  an  ancient  and  respectable  author, 
whom  the  bishop,  in  his  answer  to  me,  quotes  on  another 
occasion,  has  a  passage  that  corresponds  with  the  solution 
here  given.  In  speaking  of  the  religion  of  the  Persians 
as  promulgated  by  their  priests  or  Magi,  he  says,  the 
Jewish  rabbins  were  the  successors  of  their  doctrine. — 
Having  thus  spoken  on  the  plagiarism,  and  on  the  non- 
reality  of  the  book  of  Genesis,  I  will  give  some  additional 
evidence  that  Moses  is  "not  the  author  of  that  book. 

Bben-Ezra,  a  celebrated  Jewish  author,  who  lived 
about  seven  hundred  years  ago,  and  whom  the  bishop 
allows  to  have  been  a  man  of  great  erudition,  has  made 
a  great  many  observations,  too  numerous  to  be  repeated 
here,  to  show  that  Moses  was  not,  and  could  not  be,  the 
author  of  the  book  of  Genesis,  nor  any  of  the  five  books 
that  bear  his  name. 

Spinosa,  another  learned  Jew,  who  lived  about  a 
hundred  and  thirty  years  ago,  recites,  in  his  treatise  on 
the  ceremonies  of  the  Jews,  ancient  and  modern,  the 
observations  of  Bben-Ezra  to  which  he  adds  many  others, 
to  show  that  Moses  is  not  the  author  of  these  books.  He 
also  says,  and  shows  his  reasons  for  saying  it,  that  the 
Bible  did  not  exist   as   a   book,    till  the   time   of  the 


AGE  OF   REASON.  343 

Maccabees,  which  was  more  than  a  hundred  years  after 
the  return  of  the  Jews  from  the  Babylonian  captivity. 

In  the  second  part  of  the  Age  of  Reason,  I  have, 
among  other  things,  referred  to  nine  verses  in  the  36th 
chapter  of  Genesis,  beginning  at  the  31st  verse.  "And 
these  are  the  kings  that  reigned  in  the  land  of  Edora, 
before  there  reigned  any  king  over  the  children  of  Israel," 
which  it  is  impossible  could  have  been  written  by  Moses, 
or  in  the  time  of  Moses,  and  could  not  have  been  written 
till  after  the  Jew  kings  began  to  reign  in  Israel,  which 
was  not  till  several  hundred  years  after  the  time  of 
Moses. 

The  bishop  allows  this,  and  says,  "I  think  you  say 
true."  But  he  then  quibbles  and  says,  "that  a  small 
addition  to  a  book  does  not  destroy  either  the  genuineness 
or  authenticity  of  the  whole  book."  This  is  priestcraft. 
These  verses  do  not  stand  in  the  book  as  an  addition  to 
it,  but  as  making  a  part  of  the  whole  book,  and  which  it 
is  impossible  that  Moses  could  write.  The  bishop  would 
reject  the  antiquity  of  any  other  book  if  it  could  be 
proved  from  the  words  of  the  book  itself,  that  a  part  of 
it  could  not  have  been  written  till  several  hundred  years 
after  the  reputed  author  of  it  was  dead.  He  would  call 
such  a  book  a  forgery.  I  am  authorized,  therefore,  to 
call  the  book  of  Genesis  a  forgery. 

Combining,  then,  all  the  foregoing  circumstances 
together,  respecting  the  antiquity  and  authenticity  of 
the  book  of  Genesis,  a  conclusion  will  naturally  follow 
therefrom  ;  those  circumstances  are: — 

First,  that  certain  parts  of  the  book  cannot  possibly 
have  been  written  by  Moses,  and  that  the  other  parts 
carry  no  evidence  of  having  been  written  by  him. 

Secondly,  the  universal  silence  of  all  the  following 
books  of  the  Bible,  for  about  a  thousand  years,  upon  the 
extraordinary  things  spoken  of  in  Genesis,  such  as  the 
creation  of  the  world  in  six  days  —  the  garden  of  Eden  — 


344  AGE  OF  REASON. 

the  tree  of  knowledge — the  tree  of  life — the  story  of  Eve 
and  the  serpent — the  fall  of  man  and  his  being  turned 
out  of  this  fine  garden,  together  with  Noah's  flood,  and 
the  tower  of  Babel. 

Thirdly^  the  silence  of  all  the  books  of  the  Bible  upon 
even  the  name  of  Moses,  from  the  book  of  Joshua  until 
the  second  book  of  Kings,  which  was  not  written  till 
after  the  captivity,  for  it  gives  an  account  of  the  captivity, 
a  period  of  about  a  thousand  years.  Strange  that  a  man 
who  is  proclaimed  as  the  historian  of  the  Creation,  the 
privy-councillor  and  confident  of  the  Almighty — the 
legislator  of  the  Jewish  nation,  and  the  founder  of  its 
religion  ;  strange,  I  say,  that  even  the  name  of  such  a  man 
should  not  find  a  place  in  their  books  for  a  thousand  years, 
if  they  knew  or  believed  any  thing  about  him,  or  the 
books  he  is  said  to  have  written. 

Fourthly^  the  opinion  of  some  of  the  most  celebrated 
of  the  Jewish  commentators,  that  Moses  is  not  the  author 
of  the  book  of  Genesis,  founded  on  the  reasons  given  for 
that  opinion. 

Fifthly^  the  opinion  of  the  early  Christian  writers,  and 
of  the  great  champion  of  Jewish  literature,  Maimonides, 
that  the  book  of  Genesis  is  not  a  book  of  facts. 

Sixthly^  the  silence  imposed  by  all  the  Jewish  rabbins, 
and  by  Maimonides  himself,  upon  the  Jewish  nation,  not 
to  speak  of  any  thing  they  may  happen  to  know  or  dis- 
cover, respecting  the  cosmogony  (or  creation  of  the  world) 
in  the  book  of  Genesis.  From  these  circumstances  the 
following  conclusions  offer : 

First^  that  the  book  of  Genesis  is  not  a  book  of  facts. 

Secondly^  that  as  no  mention  is  made  throughout  the 
Bible  of  any  of  the  extraordinary  things  related  in  Genesis, 
that  it  has  not  been  written  till  after  the  other  books 
were  written,  and  put  as  a  preface  to  the  Bible.  Every 
one  knows  that  a  preface  to  a  book,  though  it  stands 
first,  is  the  last  written. 


AGK  OF  REASON.  345 

Thirdly^  that  the  silence  imposed  by  all  the  Jewish 
rabbins  and  by  Maimonides  upon  the  Jewish  nation,  to 
keep  silence  upon  every  thing  related  in  their  cosmogony, 
evinces  a  secret  they  are  not  willing  should  be  known. 
The  secret  therefore  explains  itself  to  be,  that  when  the 
Jews  were  in  captivity  in  Babylon  and  Persia,  they 
became  acquainted  with  the  cosmogony  of  the  Persians, 
as  registered  in  the  Zend-Avesta  of  Zoroaster,  the  Persian 
lawgiver,  which,  after  their  return  from  captivity,  they 
manufactured  and  modelled  as  their  own,  and  anti-dated 
it  by  giving  to  it  the  name  of  Moses,  The  case  admits 
of  no  other  explanation.  From  all  which  it  appears  that 
the  book  of  Genesis,  instead  of  being  the  oldest  book  in 
the  worlds  as  the  bishop  calls  it,  has  been  the  last  written 
book  of  the  Bible,  and  that  the  cosmogony  it  contains 
has  been  manufactured. 

ON  THE  NAMES   IN   THE   BOOK  OF  GENESIS. 

Every  thing  in  Genesis  serves  as  evidence  or  symptom 
that  the  book  has  been  composed  in  some  late  period  of 
the  Jewish  nation.  Even  the  names  mentioned  in  it 
serve  to  this  purpose. 

Nothing  is  more  common  or  more  natural,  than  to 
name  the  succeeding  generations,  after  the  names  of  those 
who  had  been  celebrated  in  some  former  generation. 
This  holds  good  with  respect  to  all  the  people  and  all 
the  histories  we  know  of,  and  it  does  not  hold  good  with 
the  Bible.     There  must  be  some  cause  for  this. 

This  book  of  Genesis  tells  us  of  a  man  whom  it  calls 
Adam,  and  of  his  sons  Abel  and  Seth  ;  of  Enoch,  who 
lived  365  years  (it  is  exactly  the  number  of  days  in  a 
year,)  and  that  then  God  took  him  up.  It  has  the 
appearance  of  being  taken  from  some  allegory  of  the 
Gentiles  on  the  commencement  and  tennination  of  the 
year,  by  the  progress  of  the  sun  through  the  twelve  signs 


346  AGE   OF   REASON. 

of  the  Zodiac,  on  which  the  allegorical  religion  of  the 
Gentiles  was  founded. 

It  tells  us  of  Methuselah,  who  lived  969  years,  and  of 
a  long  train  of  other  names  in  the  fifth  chapter.  It  then, 
passes  on  to  a  man  whom  it  calls  Noah,  and  his  sons, 
Shem,  Ham,  and  Japhet ;  then  to  Lot,  Abraham,  Isaac, 
and  Jacob,  and  his  sons,  with  which  the  book  of  Genesis 
finishes. 

All  these,  according  to  the  account  given  in  that  book, 
were  the  most  extraordinary  and  celebrated  of  men. 
They  were,  moreover,  heads  of  families.  Adam  was  the 
father  of  the  world.  Enoch,  for  his  righteousness,  was 
taken  up  to  heaven.  Methuselah  lived  to  almost  a  thou- 
sand years.  He  was  the  son  of  Enoch,  the  man  of  365, 
the  number  of  days  in  the  year.  It  has  the  appearance 
of  being  the  continuation  of  an  allegory  on  the  365  days 
of  a  year  and  its  abundant  productions.  Noah  was 
selected  from  all  the  world  to  be  preserved  when  it  was 
drowned,  and  became  the  second  father  of  the  world. 
Abraham  was  the  father  of  the  faithful  multitude.  Isaac 
and  Jacob  were  the  inheritors  of  his  fame,  and  the  last 
was  the  father  of  the  twelve  tribes. 

Now,  if  these  very  wonderful  men  and  their  names, 
and  the  book  that  records  them,  had  been  known  by  the 
Jews  before  the  Babylonian  captivity,  those  names  would 
have  been  as  common  among  the  Jews  before  that  period 
as  they  have  been  since.  We  now  hear  of  thousands  of 
Abrahams,  Isaacs,  and  Jacobs  among  the  Jews,  but  there 
were  none  of  that  name  before  the  Babylonian  captivity. 
The  Bible  does  not  mention  one,  though  from  the  time 
that  Abraham  is  said  to  have  lived  to  the  time  of  the 
Babylonian  captivity  is  about  1400  years. 

How  is  it  to  be  accounted  for  that  there  have  been  so 
many  thousands,  and  perhaps  hundreds  of  thousands  of 
Jews  of  the  names  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  since 
that  period,  and  not  one  before?     It  can  be  accounted 


AGE  OF   REASON.  347 

for  but  one  way,  which  is,  that  before  the  Babylonian 
captivity  the  Jews  had  no  such  book  as  Genesis,  nor  knew 
any  thing  of  tlie  names  and  persons  it  mentions,  nor  of 
the  things  it  relates,  and  that  the  stories  in  it  have  been 
manufactured  since  that  time.  From  the  Arabic  name 
Ibrahim  (which  is  the  manner  the  Turks  write  that  name 
to  this  day)  the  Jews  have,  most  probably,  manufactured 
their  Abraham. 

I  will  advance  my  observations  a  point  further,  and 
speak  of  the  names  of  Moses  and  Aaron^  mentioned  for 
the  first  time  in  the  book  of  Exodus.  There  are  now, 
and  have  continued  to  be  from  the  time  of  the  Babylonian 
captivity,  or  soon  after  it,  thousands  of  Jews  of  the  names 
of  Moses  and  Aaron.,  and  we  read  not  of  any  of  that 
name  before  that  time.  The  Bible  does  not  mention 
one.  The  direct  inference  from  this  is,  that  the  Jews 
knew  of  no  such  book  as  Exodus  before  the  Babylonian 
captivity.  In  fact,  that  it  did  not  exist  before  that  time, 
and  that  it  is  only  since  the  book  has  been  invented,  that 
the  names  of  Moses  and  Aaron  have  been  common 
among  the  Jews. 

It  is  applicable  to  the  purpose  to  observe,  that  the 
picturesque  work,  called  Mosaic-work.,  spelled  the  same 
as  you  would  say  the  Mosaic  account  of  the  Creation,  is 
not  derived  from  the  word  Moses^  but  from  Muses  (the 
Muses\  because  of  the  variegated  and  picturesque  pave- 
ment in  the  temples  dedicated  to  the  Muses.  This 
carries  a  strong  implication  that  the  name  Moses  is  drawn 
from  the  same  source,  and  that  he  is  not  a  real  but  an 
allegorical  person,  as  Maimonides  describes  what  is 
called  the  Mosaic  account  of  the  Creation  to  be. 

I  will  go  a  point  still  further.  The  Jews  now  know 
the  book  of  Genesis,  and  the  names  of  all  the  persons 
mentioned  in  the  first  ten  chapters  of  that  book,  from 
Adam  to  Noah  :  yet  we  do  not  hear  (I  speak  for  myself) 
ofany  Jewof  the  present  day,  of  the  name  of  Adam,  Abel, 


348  AGE  OF   REASON. 

Seth,  Enoch,  Methuselah,  Noah,  Shein,  Ham,  or  Japhet, 
(names  mentioned  in  the  first  ten  chapters,)  though  these 
were,  according  to  the  account  in  that  book,  the  most 
extraordinary  of  all  the  names  that  make  up  the  catalogue 
of  Jewish  chronology. 

The  names  the  Jews  now  adopt  are  those  that  ate 
mentioned  in  Genesis  after  the  tenth  chapter,  as  Abraham, 
Isaac,  Jacob,  &c.  How  then  does  it  happen,  that  they  do 
not  adopt  the  names  found  in  the  first  ten  chapters  ?  Here 
is  evidently  .  line  of  division  drawn  between  the  first  ten 
chapters  of  Genesis,  and  the  remaining  chapters,  with 
respect  to  the  adoption  of  names.  There  must  be  some 
cause  for  this,  and  I  go  to  offer  a  solution  of  the  problem. 

The  reader  will  recollect  the  quotation  I  have  already 
made  from  the  Jewish  rabbin  Maimonides,  wherein  he 
says,  "We  ought  not  to  understand  nor  to  take  according 
to  the  letter  that  which  is  written  in  the  book  of  the 
Creation.  It  is  a  maxim  "says  he"  which  all  our  sages 
repeat,  above  all  with  respect  to  the  work  of  six  days." 

The  qualifiying  expression  above  all^  implies  there  are 
other  parts  of  the  book,  though  not  so  important,  that 
ought  not  to  be  understood  or  taken  according  to  the 
letter,  and  as  the  Jews  do  not  adopt  the  names  mentioned 
in  the  first  ten  chapters,  it  appears  evident  those  chapters 
are  included  in  the  injunction  not  to  take  them  in  a 
literal  sense,  or  according  to  the  letter;  from  which  it 
follows  that  the  persons  or  characters  mentioned  in  the 
fijst  ten  chapters,  as  Adam,  Abel,  Seth,  Enoch,  Methuse- 
lah, and  so  on  to  Noah,  are  not  real  but  fictitious  or 
allegorical  persons,  and  therefore  the  Jews  do  not  adopt 
their  names  into  their  families.  If  they  affixed  the  same 
idea  of  reality  to  them  as  they  do  to  those  that  follow 
after  the  tenth  chapter,  the  names  of  Adam,  Abel,  Seth, 
&c.,  would  be  as  common  among  the  Jews  of  the  present 
day  as  are  those  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob,  Moses,  and 
Aaron. 


AGE  OF   REASON.  349 

In  the  superstition  they  have  been  in,  scarcely  a  Jew 
family  would  have  been  without  an  Enochs  as  a  presage 
of  his  going  to  heaven  as  ambassador  for  the  whole 
family.  Every  mother  who  wished  that  the  days  of  her 
son  might  he  long  in  the  land,  would  call  him  Methuselah; 
and  all  the  Jews  that  might  have  to  traverse  the  ocean 
would  be  named  Noah^  as  a  charm  against  shipwreck 
and  drowning. 

This  is  domestic  evidence  against  the  book  of  Genesis, 
which,  joined  to  the  several  kinds  of  evidence  before 
recited,  show  the  book  of  Genesis  not  to  be  older  than 
the  Babylonian  captivity,  and  to  be  fictitious.  I  proceed 
to  fix  the  character  and  antiquity  of  the  book  of 

JOB. 

The  book  of  Job  has  not  the  least  appearance  of  being 
a  book  of  the  Jews,  and  though  printed  among  the  books 
of  the  Bible,  does  not  belong  to  it.  There  is  no  reference 
in  it  to  any  Jewish  law  or  ceremony.  On  the  contrary, 
all  the  internal  evidence  it  contains  shows  it  to  be  a  book 
of  the  Gentiles,  either  of  Persia  or  Chaldea. 

The  name  of  Job  does  not  appear  to  be  a  Jewish  name. 
There  is  no  Jew  of  that  name  in  any  of  the  books  of  the 
Bible,  neither  is  there  now,  that  I  ever  heard  of  The 
country  where  Job  is  said  or  supposed  to  have  lived,  or 
rather  where  the  scene  of  the  drama  is  laid,  is  called  Uz, 
and  there  was  no  place  of  that  name  ever  belonging  to 
the  Jews.  If  Uz  is  the  same  as  Ur,  it  was  in  Chaldea, 
the  country  of  the  Gentiles. 

The  Jews  can  give  no  account  how  they  came  by  this 
book,  nor  who  was  the  author,  nor  the  time  when  it  was 
written,  Origen,  in  his  work  against  Celsus  (in  the  first 
ages  of  the  Christian  church),  says  that  the  book  of  Job  is 
older  than  Moses.  Eben-Ezra,  the  Jewish  commentator, 
whom  (as  I  have  before  said)  the  bishop  allows  to  have 


350  AGE   OF    REASON. 

"been  a  man  of  great  erudition,  and  who  certainly  under- 
stood his  own  language,  says,  that  the  book  of  Job  has 
been  translated  from  another  language  into  Hebrew. 
Spinosa,  another  Jewish  commentator  of  great  learning, 
confirms  the  opinion  of  Eben-Ezra,  and  says  moreover, 
"yi?  crois  que  Job  etait  Gentie ;'''*  I  believe  that  Job 
was  a  Gentile. 

The  bishop  (in  answer  to  me)  says,  "that  the  structure 
of  the  whole  book  of  Job,  in  whatever  light  of  history  or 
drama  it  be  considered,  is  founded  on  the  belief  that 
prevailed  with  the  Persians  and  Chaldeans,  and  other 
Gentile  nations,  of  a  good  and  an  evil  spirit." 

In  speaking  of  the  good  and  evil  spirit  of  the  Persians, 
the  bishop  writes  them  Ai^imanius  and  Oromasdes.  I 
will  not  dispute  about  the  orthography,  because  I  know 
that  translated  names  are  differently  spelled  in  different 
languages.  But  he  has  nevertheless  made  a  capital 
error.  He  has  put  the  Devil  first ;  for  Arimanius,  or,  as 
it  is  more  generally  written,  Ahriman^  is  the  evil  spirit^ 
and  Oromasdes^  or  Ormusd^  the  good  spirit.  He  has 
made  the  same  mistake,  in  the  same  paragraph,  in 
speaking  of  the  good  and  evil  spirit  of  the  ancient 
Egyptians,  Osiris  and  Typho^  he  puts  Typho  before 
Osiris.  The  error  is  just  the  same  as  if  the  bishop,  in 
writing  about  the  Christian  religion,  or  in  preaching  a 
sermon,  were  to  say,  the  Devil  and  God.  A  priest  ought 
to  know  his  own  trade  better.  We  agree,  however, 
about  the  structure  of  the  book  of  Job,  that  it  is  Gentile. 
I  have  said  in  the  second  part  of  the  Age  of  Reason^  and 
given  my  reasons  for  it,  that  the  drama  of  it  is  not 
Hebrew. 

From  the  testimonies  I  have  cited  —  that  of  Origen, 
who,  about  fourteen  hundred  years  ago,  said  that  the 
book  of  Job  was  more  ancient  than  Moses  ;  thatof  Eben- 

*  Spinosa  on  the   Ceremonies  of  the  yews,  page  296,  published  in  French  at  Amster- 
dam, 1678. 


A(iE   OF    REASON.  35 1 

Ezra,  who,  in  liis  commentary  on  Job,  says,  it  has  been 
translated  from  another  language  (and  consequently  from 
a  Gentile  language)  into  Hebrew  ;  that  of  Spinosa,  who 
not  only  says  the  same  thing,  but  that  the  author  of  it 
was  a  Gentile  ;  and  that  of  the  bishop,  who  says  that  the 
structure  of  the  whole  book  is  Gentile  —  it  follows,  then, 
in  the  first  place,  that  the  book  of  Job  is  not  a  book  of 
the  Jews  originally. 

Then  in  order  to  determine  to  what  people  or  nation 
any  book  of  religion  belongs,  we  must  compare  it  with 
the  leading  dogmas  and  precepts  of  that  people  or  nation  ; 
and  therefore,  upon  the  bishop's  own  construction,  the 
book  of  Job  belongs  either  to  the  ancient  Persians,  the 
Chaldeans,  or  the  Egyptians  ;  because  the  structure  of  it 
is  consistent  with  the  dogma  they  held,  that  of  a  good 
and  evil  spirit,  called  in  Job  God  and  Satan^  existing  as 
distinct  and  separate  beings,  and  it  is  not  consistent  with 
any  dogma  of  the  Jews. 

The  belief  of  a  good  and  an  evil  spirit,  existing  as 
distinct  and  separate  beings,  is  not  a  dog^ia  to  be  found 
in  any  of  the  books  of  the  Bible.  It  is  not  till  we  come 
to  the  New  Testament  that  we  hear  of  any  such  dogma. 
There  the  person  called  the  son  of  God  holds  conversa- 
tion with  Satan  on  a  mountain,  as  familiarly  as  is 
represented  in  the  drama  of  Job.  Consequently  the 
bishop  cannot  say,  in  this  respect,  that  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  founded  upon  the  Old.  According  to  the  Old^ 
the  God  of  the  Jews  was  the  God  of  every  thing.  All 
good  and  evil  came  from  him.  According  to  Exodus, 
it  was  God,  and  not  the  Devil,  that  hardened  Pharaoh's 
heart.  According  to  the  book  of  Samuel  it  was  an  evil 
spirit  from  God  that  troubled  Saul.  And  Ezekiel  makes 
God  to  say,  in  speaking  of  tlie  Jews,  ^''  I  gave  them  statutes 
that  were  not  good,  and  Judgments  by  which  should  not 
live.''''  The  Bible  describes  the  God  of  Abraham,  Isaac, 
and  Jacob,  in  such  a  contradictory  manner,  and  under 


352  AGE   OF   REASON. 

such  a  two-fold  character,  there  would  be  no  knowing 
when  he  was  in  earnest,  and  when  in  irony  ;  when  to 
believe,  and  when  not.  As  to  the  precepts,  principles, 
and  maxims  in  the  book  of  Job,  they  show  that  the 
people,  abusively  called  the  heathen  in  the  books  of  the 
Jews,  had  the  most  sublime  ideas  of  the  Creator,  and  the 
most  exalted  devotional  morality.  It  was  the  Jews  who 
dishonored  God  :  it  was  the  Gentiles  who  glorified  him. 
As  to  the  fabulous  personifications  introduced  by  the 
Greek  and  Latin  poets,  it  was  a  corruption  of  the  ancient 
religion  of  the  Gentiles,  which  consisted  in  the  adoration 
of  a  first  cause  of  the  works  of  the  creation,  in  which  the 
sun  was  the  great  visible  agent. 

It  appears  to  have  been  a  religion  of  gratitude  and 
adoration,  and  not  of  prayer  and  discontented  solicitation. 
In  Job  we  find  adoration  and  submission,  but  not  prayer. 
Bven  the  ten  commandments  enjoin  not  prayer.  Prayer 
has  been  added  to  devotion,  by  the  church  of  Rome,  as 
the  instrument  of  fees  and  perquisites.  All  prayers  by 
the  priests  of  the  Christian  church,  whether  public  or 
private,  must  be  paid  for.  It  may  be  right,  individually, 
to  pray  for  virtues,  or  mental  instruction,  but  not  for 
things.  It  is  an  attempt  to  dictate  to  the  Almighty  in 
the  government  of  the  world.  But  to  return  to  the  book 
of  Job. 

As  the  book  of  Job  decides  itself  to  be  a  book  of 
the  Gentiles,  the  next  thing  is  to  find  out  to  what 
particular  nation  it  belongs,  and,  lastly,  what  is  its 
antiquity. 

As  a  composition,  it  is  sublime,  beautiful,  and  scientific: 
full  of  sentiment,  and  abounding  in  grand  metaphorical 
description.  As  a  drama,  it  is  regular.  The  dramatis 
personse,  the  persons  performing  the  several  parts,  are 
regularly  introduced,  and  speak  without  interruption  or 
confusion.  The  scene,  as  I  have  before  said,  is  laid  in 
the  country  of  the  Gentiles,  and  the  unities,  though  not 


AGE   OF   REASON.  353 

always  necessary  in  a  drama,  are  observed  here  as  strictly 
as  the  subject  would  admit 

In  the  last  act,  where  the  Almighty  is  introduced  as 
speaking  from  the  whirlwind  to  decide  the  controversy 
between  Job  and  his  friends,  it  is  an  idea  as  grand  as 
poetical  imagination  can  conceive.  What  follows  of 
Job's  future  prosperity  does  not  belong  to  it  as  a  drama. 
It  is  an  epilogue  of  the  writer,  as  the  first  verses  of  the 
first  chapter,  which  gave  an  account  of  Job,  his  country 
and  his  riches,  are  the  prologue. 

The  book  carries  the  appearance  of  being  the  work  of 
some  of  the  Persian  Magi,  not  only  because  the  structure 
of  it  corresponds  to  the  dogmas  of  the  religion  of  those 
people,  as  founded  by  Zoroaster,  but  from  the  astronomi- 
cal references  in  it  to  the  constellations  of  the  Zodiac 
and  other  objects  in  the  heavens,  of  which  the  sun,  in 
their  religion  called  Mithra,  was  the  chief.  Job,  in  de- 
scribing the  power  of  God  (Job,  chap,  ix,  ver.  7,  8,  9,) 
says,  "Which  commandeth  the  sun,  and  it  riseth  not, 
and  sealeth  up  to  the  stars — which  alone  spreadeth  out 
the  heavens,  and  treadeth  upon  the  waves  of  the  sea  — 
which  maketh  Arcturus,  Orion,  and  Pleiades,  and  the 
chambers  of  the  south."  All  this  astronomical  allusion 
is  consistent  with  the  religion  of  the  Persians. 

Establishing  then  the  book  of  Job  as  the  work  of  some 
of  the  Persian  or  Eastern  Magi,  the  case  naturally  follows, 
that  when  the  Jews  returned  from  captivity,  by  the 
permission  of  Cyrus,  king  of  Persia,  they  brought  this 
book  with  them,  had  it  translated  into  Hebrew,  and  put 
into  their  scriptural  canons,  which  were  not  formed  till 
after  their  return.  This  will  account  for  the  name  of 
Job  being  mentioned  in  Ezekiel  (Ezekiel,  chap,  xiv,  ver. 
14,)  who  was  one  of  the  captives,  and  also  for  its  not 
being  mentioned  in  any  book  said  or  supposed  to  have 
been  written  before  the  captivity. 

Among  the  astronomical  allusions  in  the  book,  there 


354  ^^^   OF   REASON, 

is  one  which  serves  to  fix  its  antiquity.  It  is  that  where 
God  is  made  to  say  to  Job,  in  the  style  of  reprimand, 
' '  Canst  thou  bind  the  sweet  influences  of  Pleiades^ ' ' 
(chap,  xxxviii,  ver,  31.)  As  the  explanation  of  this 
depends  upon  astronomical  calculation,  I  will,  for  the 
sake  of  those  who  would  not  otherwise  understand  it, 
endeavor  to  explain  it  as  clearly  as  the  subject  will  admit. 

The  Pleiades  are  a  cluster  of  pale,  milyk  stars,  about 
the  size  of  a  man's  hand,  in  the  constellation  Taurus,  or, 
in  English,  the  Bull.  It  is  one  of  the  constellations  of 
the  zodiac,  of  which  there  are  twelve,  answering  to  the 
twelve  months  of  the  year.  The  Pleiades  are  visible  in 
the  winter  nights,  but  not  in  the  summer  nights,  being 
then  below  the  horizon. 

The  zodiac  is  an  imaginar}-  belt  or  circle  in  the 
heavens,  eighteen  degrees  broad,  in  which  the  sun 
apparently  makes  his  annual  course,  and  in  which  all 
the  planets  move.  When  the  sun  appears  to  our  view  to 
be  between  us  and  the  group  of  stars  forming  such  or  such 
a  constellation,  he  is  said  to  be  in  that  constellation. 
Consequently  the  constellations  he  appears  to  be  in,  in 
the  summer,  are  directly  opposite  to  those  he  appeared 
in,  in  the  winter,  and  the  same  with  respect  to  spring- 
and  autumn. 

The  zodiac,  besides  being  divided  into  twelve  con- 
stellations, is  also  like  even^  other  circle,  great  or  small, 
divided  into  360  equal  parts,  called  degrees  ;  consequently 
each  constellation  contains  thirty  degrees.  The  constella- 
tions of  the  zodiac  are  generally  called  signs,  to  distin- 
guish them  from  the  constellations  that  are  placed  out 
of  the  zodiac,  and  this  is  the  name  I  shall  now  use. 

The  precession  of  the  equinoxes  is  the  part  most  difficult 
to  explain,  and  it  is  on  this  that  the  explanation  chiefly 
depends.  The  equinoxes  correspond  to  the  two  seasons 
of  the  year  when  the  sun  makes  equal  day  and  night. 

Th*  followtng  disconneclfd  part  of  the  same  work  was  ft  st  published  in  1S34. 


AGK   OF    REASON.  ^55 

SABBATH,  OR  SUNDAY. 

The  seventh  day,  or  more  properly  speaking  the  period 
of  seven  days,  was  originally  a  numerical  division  of  time 
and  nothing  more  ;  and  had  the  bishop  been  acquainted 
with  the  history  of  astronomy,  he  would  have  known 
this.  The  annual  revolution  of  the  earth  makes  what 
we  call  a  year. 

The  year  is  artificially  divided  into  months,  the  months 
into  weeks  of  seven  days,  the  days  into  hours,  &c.  The 
period  of  seven  days,  like  any  other  of  the  artificial  divis- 
ions of  the  year,  is  only  a  fractional  part  therof,  contrived 
for  the  convenience  of  countries. 

It  is  ignorance,  imposition,  and  priestcraft,  that  have 
called  it  otherwise.  They  might  as  well  talk  of  the 
Lord's  month,  of  the  Lord's  week,  of  the  Lord's  hour, 
as  of  the  Lord's  day.  All  time  is  his,  and  no  part  of  it  is 
more  holy  or  more  sacred  than  another.  It  is,  however, 
necessary  to  the  trade  of  a  priest,  that  he  should  preach 
up  a  distinction  of  days. 

Before  the  science  of  astronomy  was  studied  and  carried 
to  the  degree  of  eminence  to  which  it  was  by  the  Eg>'ptians 
and  Chaldeans,  the  people  of  those  times  had  no  other 
helps,  than  what  common  observation  of  the  very  visible 
changes  of  the  sun  and  moon  afforded,  to  enable  them  to 
keep  an  account  of  the  progress  of  time.  As  far  as  his- 
tory establishes  the  point,  the  Eg>'ptians  were  the  first 
people  who  divided  the  year  into  twelve  months. 
Herodotus,  who  lived  above  two  thousand  two  hundred 
years  ago,  and  is  the  most  ancient  historian  whose  works 
have  reached  our  time,  says,  they  did  this  by  the  knowl- 
edge they  had  of  the  stars.  As  to  the  Jews,  there  is  not 
one  single  improvement  in  any  science  or  in  any  scien- 
tific art,  that  they  ever  produced.  They  were  the  most 
ignorant  of  all  the  illiterate  world.  If  the  word  of  the 
X*ord  had  come  to  them,  as  they  pretend,  and  as  the 


356  AGE   OF   REASON. 

bishop  professes  to  believe,  and  that  they  were  to  be  the 
harbingers  of  it  to  the  rest  of  the  world ;  the  Lord  would 
have  taught  them  the  use  of  letters,  and  the  art  of  print- 
ing ;  for  without  the  means  of  communicating  the  word, 
it  could  not  be  communicated  ;  whereas  letters  were  the 
invention  of  the  Gentile  world;  and  printing  of  the 
modern  world.     But  to  return  to  my  subject : 

Before  the  helps  which  the  science  of  astronomy 
aflforded,  the  people,  as  before  said,  had  no  other  where- 
by to  keep  an  account  of  the  progress  of  time  than  what 
the  common  and  very  visible  changes  of  the  sun  and 
moon  afforded.  They  saw  that  a  great  number  of  days 
made  a  year,  but  the  account  of  them  was  too  tedious, 
and  too  difficult  to  be  kept  numerically,  from  one  to 
three  hundred  and  sixty-five  ;  neither  did  they  know  the 
true  time  of  a  solar  year.  It  therefore  became  necessary, 
for  the  purpose  of  marking  the  progress  of  days,  to  put 
them  into  small  parcels,  such  as  are  now  called  weeks  ; 
and  which  consisted  as  they  now  do  of  seven  days.  By 
this  means  the  memory  was  assisted  as  it  is  with  us  at 
this  day ;  for  we  do  not  say  of  any  thing  that  is  past, 
that  it  was  fifty,  sixty,  or  seventy  days  ago,  but  that  it 
was  so  many  weeks,  or,  if  longer  time,  so  many  months. 
It  is  impossible  to  keep  an  account  of  time  without  helps 
of  this  kind. 

Julian  Scaliger,  the  inventor  of  the  Julian  period  of 
7,980  years,  produced  by  multiplying  the  cycle  of  the 
moon,  the  cycle  of  the  sun,  and  the  years  of  an  indiction, 
19,  28,  15,  into  each  other  ;  says,  that  the  custom  of 
reckoning  by  periods  of  seven  days  was  used  by  the 
Assyrians,  the  Egyptians,  the  Hebrews,  the  people  of 
India,  the  Arabs,  and  by  all  the  nations  of  the  east. 

In  addition  to  what  Scaliger  says,  it  is  evident  that  in 
Britain,  in  Germany,  and  the  north  of  Europe,  they 
reckoned  by  periods  of  seven  days,  long  before  the  book 
called  the  Bible  was  known  in  those  parts ;  and,  con- 


AGE   OF   REASON.  357 

sequently,  that  they  did  not  take  that  mode  of  reckoning 
from  any  thing  written  in  that  book. 

That  they  reckoned  by  periods  of  seven  days  is  evident 
from  their  having  seven  names  and  no  more  for  the 
several  days ;  and  which  have  not  the  most  distant  rela- 
tion to  any  thing  in  the  book  of  Genesis,  or  to  that 
which  is  called  the  fourth  commandment. 

Those  names  are  still  retained  in  England,  with  no 
other  alteration  than  what  has  been  produced  by  mould- 
ing the  Saxon  and  Danish  languages  into  modern 
English. 

1.  Sun-day  Sunna  the  sun,  and  d(Eg^  day,  Saxon. 
Sondag^  Danish.     The  day  dedicated  to  the  sun. 

2.  Monday,  that  is,  moonday,  from  Mona,  the  moon, 
Saxon.     Maanc,  Danish.     Day  dedicated  to  the  moon. 

3.  Tuesday,  that  is  Tuis-cd'  s-day.  The  day  dedicated 
to  the  Idol  Tuisco. 

4.  Wednes-day,  that  is  Woden' s-day.  The  day  ded- 
icated to  Woden^  the  Mars  of  the  Germans. 

5.  Thursday,  that  is,  Thor' s-day  dedicated  to  the  Idol 
Thor. 

6.  Friday,  that  is  Friga^  s-day.  The  day  dedicated  to 
Friga^  the  Venus  of  the  Saxons. 

Saturday  from  Sceter  {Saturn)  an  Idol  of  the  Saxons  ; 
one  of  the  emblems  representing  time,  which  continually 
terminates  and  renews  itself:  The  last  day  of  the  period 
of  seven  days. 

When  we  see  a  certain  mode  of  reckoning  general  among 
nations  totally  unconnected,  differing  from  each  other 
in  religion  and  in  government,  and  some  of  them  un- 
known to  each  other,  we  may  be  certain  that  it  arises 
from  some  natural  and  common  cause,  prevailing  alike 
over  all,  and  which  strikes  every  one  in  the  same 
manner.  Thus  all  nations  have  reckoned  arithmeti- 
cally by  tens,  because  the  people  of  all  nations  have 
ten  finvi^ers.     If  they  had  more  or  less  than  ten,  the  mode 


358  AGE   OF   REASON. 

of  arithmetical  reckoning  would  have  followed  that 
number,  for  the  fingers  are  a  natural  numeration  table  to 
all  the  world,  I  now  come  to  show  why  the  period  of 
seven  days  is  so  generally  adopted. 

Though  the  sun  is  the  great  luminary  of  the  world, 
and  the  animating  cause  of  all  the  fruits  of  the  earth, 
the  moon  by  renewing  herself  more  than  twelve  times 
oftener  than  the  sun,  which  does  it  but  once  a  3'ear, 
served  the  rustic  world  as  a  natural  almanac,  as  the 
fingers  served  it  for  a  numeration  table.  All  the  world 
could  see  the  moon,  her  changes,  and  her  monthly 
revolutions ;  and  their  mode  of  reckoning  time,  was 
accommodated  as  nearly  as  could  possibly  be  done  in 
round  numbers,  to  agree  with  the  changes  of  that  planet, 
— their  natural  almanac. 

The  moon  performs  her  natural  revolution  round  the 
earth  in  twenty-nine  days  and  a  half.  She  goes  from  a 
new  moon  to  a  half  moon,  to  a  full  moon,  to  a  half  moon 
gibbous  or  convex,  and  then  to  a  new  moon  again.  Each 
of  these  changes  is  performed  in  seven  days  and  nine 
hours ;  but  seven  days  is  the  nearest  division  in  round 
numbers  that  could  be  taken  ;  and  this  was  sufficient  to 
suggest  the  universal  custom  of  reckoning  by  periods  of 
seven  days,  since  it  is  impossible  to  reckon  time  without 
some  stated  period. 

How  the  odd  hours  could  be  disposed  of  without  inter- 
fering with  the  regular  periods  of  seven  days,  in  case  the 
ancients  recommenced  a  new  Septenary  period  with  every 
new  moon,  required  no  more  difficulty  than  it  did  to 
regulate  the  Egyptian  Calendar  afterwards  of  twelve 
months  of  thirty  days  each,  or  the  odd  hour  in  the  Julian 
Calendar,  or  the  odd  days  and  hours  in  the  French - 
Calendar,  In  all  cases  it  is  done  by  the  addition  of  com- 
plementary days  ;  and  it  can  be  done  in  no  other  way. 

The  bishop  knows  that  as  the  Solar  year  does  not  end  at 
the  termination  of  what  we  call  a  day,  but  runs  some  hours 


AGE  OF   REASON.  359 

into  the  next  day,  as  the  quarters  of  the  moon  runs  some 
hours  beyond  seven  days  ;  that  it  is  impossible  to  give  the 
year  any  fixed  number  of  days,  that  will  not  in  course  of 
years  become  wrong,  and  make  a  complementary  time 
necessary  to  keep  the  nominal  year  parallel  with  the  solar 
year.  The  same  must  have  been  the  case  with  those  who 
regulated  time  formerly  by  lunar  revolutions.  They 
would  have  to  add  three  days  to  ever>'  second  moon,  or 
in  that  proportion,  in  order  to  make  the  new  moon  and 
the  new  week  commence  together  like  the  nominal  year 
and  the  solar  year. 

Diodonis  of  Sicily,  who,  as  before  said,  lived  before 
Christ  was  born,  in  giving  an  account  of  times  much 
anterior  to  his  own,  speaks  of  years  of  three  months,  of 
four  months,  and  of  six  months.  These  could  be  of  no  other 
than  years  composed  of  lunar  revolutions,  and,  therefore, 
to  bring  the  several  periods  of  seven  days  to  agree  with 
such  years,  there  must  have  been  complementary  days. 

The  moon  was  the  first  almanac  the  world  knew  ;  and 
the  only  one  which  the  face  of  the  heavens  ajBforded  to 
common  spectators.  Her  changes  and  her  revolutions 
have  entered  into  all  the  Calendars  that  have  been  known 
in  the  known  world. 

The  division  of  the  year  into  twelve  months,  which,  as 
before  shown,  was  first  done  by  the  Egyptians,  though 
arranged  with  astronomical  knowledge,  had  reference  to 
the  twelve  moons,  or  more  properly  speaking,  to  the  twelve 
lunar  revolutions  that  appear  in  the  space  of  a  solar  year, 
as  the  period  of  seven  days  had  reference  to  one  revolution 
of  the  moon.  The  feasts  of  the  Jews  were,  and  those  of  the 
Christian  church  still  are,  regulated  by  the  moon.  The 
Jews  observed  the  feasts  of  the  new  and  full  moon,  and 
therefore  the  period  of  seven  days  was  necessary  to  them. 

AH  the  feasts  of  the  Christian  church  are  regulated  by 
the  moon.  That  called  Easter  governs  all  the  rest,  and  the 
moon  governs  Easter.     It  is  always  the  first  Sunday  after 


360  AGE   OF    REASON. 

the  first  full  moon  that  happens  after  the  vernal  Equinox, 
or  2ist  of  March. 

In  proportion  as  the  science  of  astronomy  was  studied 
and  improved  by  the  Egyptians  and  Chaldeans,  and  the 
solar  year  regulated  by  astronomical  observations,  the 
custom  of  reckoning  by  lunar  revolutions  became  of  less 
use,  and  in  time  discontinued.  But  such  is  the  harmony 
of  all  parts  of  the  machinery  of  the  universe,  that  a  cal- 
culation made  from  the  motion  of  one  part  will  correspond 
with  the  motion  of  some  other. 

The  period  of  seven  days  deduced  from  the  revolution  of 
the  moon  round  the  earth,  corresponds  nearer  than  any 
other  period  of  days  would  do  to  the  revolution  of  the 
earth  round  the  sun.  Fifty-two  periods  of  seven  days 
make  364,  which  is  within  one  day  and  some  odd  hours 
of  a  solar  year  ;  and  there  is  no  other  periodical  number 
that  will  do  the  same,  till  we  come  to  the  number  thir- 
teen, which  is  too  great  for  common  use,  and  the  numbers 
before  seven  are  too  small.  The  custom,  therefore,  of 
reckoning  by  periods  of  seven  days,  as  best  suited  to  the 
revolution  of  the  moon,  applied  with  equal  convenience 
to  the  solar  year,  and  became  united  with  it.  But  the 
decimal  division  of  time,  as  regulated  by  the  French 
Calendar,  is  superior  to  every  other  method. 

There  is  no  part  of  the  Bible  that  is  supposed  to  have 
been  written  by  persons  who  lived  before  the  time  of  Josiah, 
(which  was  a  thousand  years  after  the  time  of  Moses,)  that 
mentions  any  thing  about  the  sabbath  as  a  day  consecrated 
to  that  which  is  called  the  fourth  commandment,  or  that 
the  Jews  kept  any  such  day.  Had  any  such  day  been  kept, 
during  the  thousand  years  of  which  I  am  speaking,  it  cer- 
tainly would  have  been  mentioned  frequently  ;  and  that  it 
should  never  be  mentioned,  is  strong  presumptive  and  cir- 
cumstantial evidence  that  no  such  day  was  kept.  But 
mention  is  often  made  of  the  feasts  of  the  new  moon,  and 
of  the  full  moon ;  for  the  Jews,  as  before  shown,  worshipped 


AGE  OF   REASON.  361 

the  moon  ;  and  the  word  sabbath  was  applied  by  the  Jews 
to  the  feasts  of  that  planet,  and  to  those  of  their  other 
deities.  It  is  said  in  Hosea,  chap.  2,  verse  1 1,  in  speaking 
of  the  Jewish  nation,  ''And  I  will  cause  all  her  mirth  to 
cease,  her  feast-days,  her  new-moons^  and  her  sabbaths^  and 
all  her  solemn  feasts."  Nobody  will  be  so  foolish  as  to 
contend  that  the  sabbaths  here  spoken  of  are  Mosaic 
sabbaths.  The  construction  of  the  verse  implies  they  are 
lunar  sabbaths,  or  sabbaths  of  the  moon.  It  ought  also  to 
be  observed  that  Hosea  lived  in  the  time  of  Ahaz  and 
Hezekiah,  about  seventy  years  before  the  time  of  Josiah, 
when  the  law  called  the  law  of  Moses  is  said  to  have  been 
found  ;  and  consequently,  the  sabbaths  that  Hosea  speaks 
of  are  sabbaths  of  the  Idolatry. 

When  those  priestly  refonners,  (impostors  I  should  call 
them,)  Hiikiah,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah,  began  to  produce 
books  under  the  name  of  the  books  of  Moses,  they  found 
the  word  sabbath  in  use :  and  as  to  the  period  of  seven 
days,  it  is  like  numbering  arithmetically  by  tens,  from 
time  immemorial.  But  having  found  them  in  use,  they 
continued  to  make  them  serve  to  the  support  of  their  new 
imposition.  They  trumped  up  a  story  of  the  creation  being 
made  in  six  days,  and  of  the  Creator  resting  on  the  seventh, 
to  suit  with  the  lunar  and  chronological  period  of  seven 
days ;  and  they  manufactured  a  commandment  to  agree 
with  both.  Impostors  always  work  in  this  manner. 
They  put  fables  for  originals,  and  causes  for  effects. 

There  is  scarcely  any  part  of  science,  or  any  thing  in 
nature,  which  those  impostors  and  blasphemers  of  science, 
called  priests,  as  well  Christians  as  Jews,  have  not,  at  some 
time  or  other,  perverted,  or  sought  to  pervert  to  the  purpose 
of  superstition  and  falsehood.  Every  thing  wonderful  in 
appearance,  has  been  ascribed  to  angels,  to  devils,  or  to 
saints.  Every  thing  ancient  lias  j^ome  legendary  tale 
annexed  to  it.  The  common  operations  of  nature  have  not 
escaped  their  practice  of  corrupting  every  thing. 


362  AGE   OF    RP:AS0N. 

FUTURE  STATE. 

The  idea  of  a  future  state  was  a  universal  idea  to  all 
nations  except  the  Jews.  At  the  time  and  long  before 
Jesus  Christ  and  the  men  called  his  disciples  were  bom,  it 
had  been  sublimely  treated  of  by  Cicero  in  his  book  on 
old  age,  by  Plato,  Socrates,  Xenophon,  and  other  of  the 
ancient  theologists,  whom  the  abusive  Christian  church 
calls  heathen.  Xenophon  represents  the  elder  Cyrus 
speaking  after  this  manner : 

**  Think  not,  my  dearest  children,  that  when  I  depart 
from  you,  I  shall  be  no  more  :  but  remember  that  my  soul, 
even  while  I  lived  among  you,  was  invisible  to  you  ;  yet 
by  my  actions  you  were  sensible  it  existed  in  this  body. 
Believe  it  therefore  existing  still,  though  it  be  still  unseen. 
How  quickly  would  the  honors  of  illustrious  men  perish 
after  death,  if  their  souls  performed  nothing  to  preserve 
their  fame  !  For  my  own  part,  I  could  never  think  that 
the  soul,  while  in  a  mortal  body,  lives,  but  when  departed 
from  it  dies  ;  or  that  its  consciousness  is  lost,  when  it  is 
discharged  out  of  an  unconscious  habitation.  But  when 
it  is  freed  from  all  corporeal  alliance,  it  is  then  that  it 
truly  exists. ' ' 

Since,  then,  the  idea  of  a  future  existence  was  univer- 
sal, it  may  be  asked,  what  new  doctrine  does  the  Ne-w 
Testament  contain?  I  answer,  that  of  corrupting  the 
theory  of  the  ancient  theologists,  by  annexing  to  it  the 
heavy  and  gloomy  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  of  the  body. 

As  to  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  whether  the  same 
body  or  another,  it  is  a  miserable  conceit,  fit  only  to  be 
preached  to  man  as  an  animal.  It  is  not  worthy  to  be 
called  doctrine.  Such  an  idea  never  entered  the  brain  of 
any  visionary  but  those  of  the  Christian  church  ; — yet  it 
is  in  this  that  the  novelty  oiW\&  New  Testament  consists. 
All  the  other  matters  serve  but  as  props  to  this,  and  those 
props  are  most  wretchedly  put  together. 


AGE   OF   REASON.  363 

MIRACLES. 

The  Christian  church  is  full  of  miracles.  In  one  of  the 
churches  of  Brabant,  they  show  a  number  of  cannon  balls, 
which,  they  say,  the  virgin  Mary,  in  some  former  war, 
caught  in  her  muslin  apron  as  they  came  roaring  out  of 
the  cannon's  mouth,  to  prevent  their  hurting  the  saints 
of  her  favorite  army.  She  does  no  such  feats  now-a-days. 
Perhaps  the  reason  is,  that  the  infidels  have  taken  away 
her  muslin  apron.  They  show  also,  between  Montmatre 
and  the  village  of  St.  Dennis,  several  places  where  they 
say  St.  Dennis  stopped  with  his  head  in  his  hands  after  it 
had  been  cut  off  at  Montmatre.  The  Protestants  will  call 
those  things  lies ;  and  where  is  the  proof  that  all  the  other 
things  called  miracles  are  not  as  great  lies  as  those  ? 

[There  appears  to  be  an  omission  here. in  the  copy.] 

Christ,  say  those  Cabalists,  came  in  \\\^  fulness  of  time. 
And  pray  what  is  the  fulness  of  time?  The  words  admit 
of  no  idea.  They  are  perfectly  Cabalistical.  Time  is  a 
word  invented  to  describe  to  our  conception  a  greater  or 
less  portion  of  eternity.  It  may  be  a  minute,  a  portion 
of  eternity  measured  by  the  vibration  of  a  pendulum  of  a  • 
certain  length  ; — it  may  be  a  day,  a  year,  a  hundred,  or  a 
thousand  years,  or  any  other  quantity.  Those  portions 
are  only  greater  or  less  comparatively. 

The  word  fulness  applies  not  to  any  of  them.  The  idea 
of  fulness  of  time  cannot  be  conceived.  A  woman  with 
child  and  ready  for  delivery,  as  Mary  was  when  Christ  was 
born,  may  be  said  to  have  gone  her  full  time  ;  but  it  is 
the  woman  that  is  full,  not  time. 

It  may  also  be  said  figuratively,  in  certain  cases,  that 
the  times  are  full  of  events  ;  but  time  itself  is  incapable 
of  being  full  of  itself.  Ye  hypocrites !  learn  to  speak 
intelligible  language. 

It  happened  to  be  a  time  of  peace  when  they  say  Christ 
was  bom  ;  and  what  then?     There  had  been  many  such 


364  AGE   OF   REASON. 

intervals  :  and  have  been  many  such  since.  Time  was  no 
fuller  in  any  of  them  than  in  the  others.  If  he  were,  he 
would  be  fuller  now  than  he  ever  was  before.  If  he  was 
full  then,  he  must  be  bursting  now.  But  peace  or  war 
have  relation  to  circumstances,  and  not  to  time  ;  and  those 
Cabalists  would  be  at  as  much  loss  to  make  out  any 
meaning  to  fulness  of  circumstances,  as  to  fulness  of  time  ; 
and  if  they  could,  it  would  be  fatal ;  for  fulness  of  cir- 
cumstances would  mean,  when  there  are  no  more  cir- 
cumstances to  happen  ;  and  fulness  of  time  when  there  is 
no  more  time  to  follow. 

Christ,  therefore,  like  every  other  person,  was  neither 
in  the  fulness  of  one  nor  the  other. 

But  though  we  cannot  conceive  the  idea  of  fulness  of 
time,  because  we  cannot  have  conception  of  a  time  when 
there  shall  be  no  time  ;  nor  of  fulness  of  circumstances, 
because  we  cannot  conceive  a  state  of  existence  to  be  with- 
out circumstances  ;  we  can  often  see,  after  a  thing  is  past, 
if  any  circumstance,  necessary  to  give  the  utmost  activity 
and  success  to  that  thing,  was  wanting  at  the  time  that 
thing  took  place.  If  such  a  circumstance  was  wanting, 
we  may  be  certain  that  the  thing  which  took  place,  was 
not  a  thing  of  God's  ordaining;  whose  work  is  always 
perfect,  and  his  means  perfect  means.  They  tell  us  that 
Christ  was  the  Son  of  God  ;  in  that  case,  he  would  have 
known  every  thing ;  and  he  came  upon  earth  to  make 
known  the  will  of  God  to  man  throughout  the  whole  earth. 
If  this  had  been  true,  Christ  would  have  known  and 
would  have  been  furnished  with  all  the  possible  means  of 
doing  it ;  and  would  have  instructed  mankind,  or  at  least 
his  apostles,  in  the  use  of  such  of  the  means  as  they  could 
use  themselves  to  facilitate  the  accomplishment  of  the 
mission ;  consequently  he  would  have  instructed  them 
in  the  art  of  printing,  for  the  press  is  the  tongue  of  the 
world ;  and  without  which,  his  or  their  preaching  was 
less  than  a  whistle  compared  to  thunder.      Since,  then, 


AGE  OF  REASON.  365 

he  did  not  do  this,  he  had  not  the  means  necessary  to  the 
mission  ;  and  consequently  had  not  the  mission. 

They  tell  us  in  the  book  of  Acts,  chap,  ii,  a  very  stupid 
story  of  the  Apostles'  having  the  gift  of  tongues ;  and 
cloven  tongues  of  fire  descended  and  sat  upon  each  of  them. 
Perhaps  it  was  this  stoiy  of  cloven  tongues  that  gave  rise 
to  the  notion  of  slitting  jackdaws'  tongues  to  make  them 
talk.  Be  that  however  as  it  may,  the  gift  of  tongues, 
even  if  it  were  true,  would  be  but  of  little  use  without  the 
art  of  printing.  I  can  sit  in  my  chamber,  as  I  do  while 
writing  this,  and  by  the  aid  of  printing,  can  send  the 
thoughts  I  am  writing  through  the  greatest  part  of  Europe, 
to  the  Ea*t  Indies,  and  over  all  North  America,  in  a  few 
months.  Jesus  Christ  and  his  apostles  could  not  do  this. 
They  had  not  the  means,  and  the  wan  t  of  means  detects 
the  pretended  mission. 

There  are  three  modes  of  communication.  Speaking, 
writing  and  printing.  The  first  is  exceedingly  limited. 
A  man's  voice  can  be  heard  but  a  few  yards  of  distance; 
and  his  person  can  be  but  in  one  place. 

Writing  is  much  more  extensive  ;  but  the  thing  written 
cannot  be  multiplied  but  at  great  expense,  and  the  mul- 
tiplication will  be  slow  and  incorrect.  Were  there  no  other 
means  of  circulating  what  priests  call  the  word  of  God 
(the  Old  and  New  Testament)  than  by  writing  copies, 
those  copies  could  not  be  purchased  at  less  than  forty 
pounds  sterling  each  ;  consequently  but  few  people  could 
purchase  them,  while  the  writers  could  scarcely  obtain  a 
livelihood  by  it.  But  the  art  of  printing  changes  all  the 
cases,  and  opens  a  scene  as  vast  as  the  world.  It  gives  to 
man  a  sort  of  divine  attribute.  It  gives  to  him  mental 
omnipresence.  He  can  be  every  where,  and  at  the  same 
instant ;  for  wherever  he  is  read  he  is  mentally  there. 

The  case  applies  not  only  against  the  pretended  mission 
of  Christ  and  his  Apostles,  but  against  every  thing  that 
priests  call  the  word  of  God,  and  against  all  those  who 


^66  ^  AGE   OF   REASON. 

preteud  to  deliver  it ;  for  had  God  ever  delivered  any 
verbal  word,  he  would  have  taught  the  rtieans  of  com- 
muuicating  it.  The  one  without  the  other  is  inconsist- 
ent with  the  wisdom  we  conceive  of  the  Creator. 

The  third  chapter  of  Genesis,  verse  21,  tells  us  that  God 
made  coats  of  skins  and  clothed  Adam  and  Eve.  It  was 
infinitely  more  important  that  man  should  be  taught  the 
art  of  printing,  than  that  Adam  should  be  taught  to  make 
a  pair  of  leather  breeches,  or  his  wife  a  petticoat. 

There  is  another  matter,  equally  striking  and  impor- 
tant, that  connects  itself  with  those  observations  against 
this  pretended  word  of  God — this  manufactured  book, 
called  Revealed  Religion.  » 

We  know  that  whatever  is  of  God's  doing  is  unalterable 
by  man  beyond  the  laws  which  the  Creator  has  ordained. 
We  cannot  make  a  tree  grow  with  the  root  in  the  air  and 
the  fruit  in  the  ground ;  we  cannot  make  iron  into  gold 
nor  gold  into  iron ;  we  cannot  make  rays  of  light  shine 
forth  rays  of  darkness,  nor  darkness  shine  forth  light. 
If  there  were  such  a  thing  as  a  word  of  God,  it  would 
possess  the  same  properties  which  all  his  other  works  do. 
It  would  resist  destructive  alteration.  But  we  see  that  the 
book  which  they  call  the  word  of  God  has  not  this  prop- 
erty. That  book  says,  Genesis  chap,  i,  verse  27,  ''So 
God  created  man  in  his  own  image;''''  but  the  printer 
can  make  it  say.  So  man  created  God  in  his  own  image. 
The  words  are  passive  to  every  transposition  of  them,  or 
can  be  annihilated  and  others  put  in  their  places.  This 
is  not  the  case  with  any  thing  that  is  of  God's  doing ;  and 
therefore,  this  book,  called  the  word  of  God,  tried  by  the 
same  universal  rule  which  every  other  of  God's  works 
within  our  reach  can  be  tried  by,  proves  itself  to  be  a 
forgery. 

The  bishop  says,  that  ''''miracles  are  proper  proof  of  a 
divine  mission.''''  Admitted.  But  we  know  that  men, 
and  especially  priests,  can  tell  lies  and  call  them  miracles. 


AGE  OF  REASON.  367 

It  is  therefore  necessary  that  the  thing  called  a  miracle 
be  proved  to  be  true,  and  also  to  be  miraculous,  before 
it  can  be  admitted  as  proof  of  the  thing  called  reve- 
lation. 

The  bishop  must  be  a  bad  logician  not  to  know  that 
one  doubtful  thing  cannot  be  admitted  as  proof  that  an- 
other doubtful  thiug  is  true.  It  would  be  like  attempting 
to  prove  a  liar  not  to  be  a  liar  by  the  evidence  of  another, 
who  is  as  great  a  liar  as  himself 

Though  Jesus  Christ,  by  being  ignorant  of  the  art  of 
printing,  shows  he  had  not  the  means  necessary  to  a  divine 
mission,  and  consequently  had  no  such  mission ;  it  does 
not  follow  that  if  he  had  known  that  art,  the  divinity  of 
what  they  call  his  mission  would  be  proved  thereby,  any 
more  than  it  proved  the  divinity  of  the  man  who  invented 
printing.  Something  therefore  beyond  printing,  even  if 
he  had  known  it,  was  necessary  as  a  miracle^  to  have 
proved  that  what  he  delivered  was  the  word  of  God  ;  and 
this  was  that  the  book  in  which  that  word  should  be  con- 
tained, which  is  now  called  the  Oidsind  New  Testament^ 
should  possess  the  miraculous  property,  distinct  from  all 
human  books,  of  resisting  alteration.  This  would  be  not 
only  a  miracle,  but  an  ever  existing  and  universal  miracle ; 
whereas,  those  which  they  tell  us  of,  even  if  they  had  been 
true,  were  momentary  and  local ;  they  would  leave  no 
trace  behind,  after  the  lapse  of  a  few  years,  of  having  ever 
existed ;  but  this  would  prove,  in  all  ages  and  in  all 
places,  the  book  to  be  divine  and  not  human,  as  effectu- 
ally, and  as  conveniently,  as  aquafortis  proves  gold  to  be 
gold  by  not  being  capable  of  acting  upon  it ;  and  de- 
tects all  other  metals  and  all  counterfeit  composition,  by 
dissolving  them.  Since  then  the  only  miracle  capable  of 
every  proof  is  wanting,  and  which  every  thing  that  is  of 
a  divine  origin  possesses,  all  the  tales  of  miracles  with 
which  the  O/a^and  New  Testament  2ire  filled,  are  fit  only 
for  impostors  to  preach  and  fools  to  believe. 


A   LETTER, 


BEING  AN  ANSWER  TO  A  FRIEND   ON   THE   PUBLICATION 
OF  THE  AGE  OF   REASON. 


Paris^  May  12^  ^797- 

IN  your  letter  of  the  20th  of  March,  you  gave  me 
several  quotations  from  the  Bible,  which  you  call  the 
word  of  God,  to  show  me  that  my  opinions  on  religion 
are  wrong,  and  I  could  give  you  as  many,  from  the  same 
book,  to  show  that  yours  are  not  right ;  consequently, 
then,  the  Bible  decides  nothing,  because  it  decides  any 
way,  and  every  way,  one  chooses  to  make  it. 

But  by  what  authority  .do  you  call  the  Bible  the  word 
0/  God?  for  this  is  the  first  point  to  be  settled.  It  is  not 
your  calling  it  so  that  makes  it  so,  any  more  than  the 
Mahometans  calling  the  Koran  the  word  0/ God  mak.ts 
the  Koran  to  be  so.  The  Popish  Councils  of  Nice  and 
Laodicea,  about  350  years  after  the  time  that  the  person 
called  Jesus  Christ  is  said  to  have  lived,  voted  the  books, 
that  now  compose  what  is  called  the  New  Testament^  to 
be  the  word  of  God.  This  was  done  by  yeas  and  nays, 
as  we  now  vote  a  law.  The  Pharisees  of  the  second 
Temple,  after  the  Jews  returned  from  captivity  in  Babylon, 
did  the  same  by  the  books  that  now  compose  the  Old 
Testament,  and  this  is  all  the  authority  there  is,  which 
to  me  is  no  authority  at  all.  I  am  as  capable  of  judging 
for  myself  as  they  were,  and  I  think  more  so,  because,  as 


AGE   OF   REASON.  369 

they  made  a  living  by  their  religion,  they  had  a  self- 
interest  in  the  vote  they  gave. 

You  may  have  an  opinion  that  a  man  is  inspired,  but 
you  cannot  prove  it,  nor  can  you  have  any  proof  of  it 
yourself,  because  you  cannot  see  into  his  mind  in  order 
to  know  how  he  comes  by  his  thoughts,  and  the  same  is 
the  case  with  the  word  revelation.  —  There  can  be  no 
evidence  of  such  a  thing,  for  you  can  no  more  prove 
revelation,  than  you  can  prove  what  another  man  dreams 
of,  neither  can  he  prove  it  himself 

It  is  often  said  in  the  Bible  that  God  spake  unto  Moses, 
but  how  do  you  know  that  God  spake  unto  Moses? 
Because,  you  will  say,  the  Bible  says  so.  The  Koran 
says,  that  God  spake  unto  Mahomet ;  do  you  believe  that 
too?  No.  Why  not?  Because,  you  will  say,  you  do  not 
believe  it ;  and  so  because  you  do^  and  because  you  donU^ 
is  all  the  reason  you  can  give  for  believing  or  disbelieving, 
except  you  will  say  that  Mahomet  was  an  impostor. 
And  how  do  you  know  Moses  was  not  an  impostor?  For 
my  own  part,  I  believe  that  all  are  impostors  who  pretend 
to  hold  verbal  communication  with  the  Deity.  It  is  the 
way  by  which  the  world  has  been  imposed  upon  ;  but  if 
you  think  otherwise  you  have  the  same  right  to  your 
opinion  that  I  have  to  mine,  and  must  answer  for  it  in 
the  same  manner.  But  all  this  does  not  settle  the  point, 
whether  the  Bible  be  the  word  o/God^  or  not.  It  is,  there- 
fore, necessary  to  go  a  step  further.     The  case  then  is : 

You  form  your  opinion  of  God  from  the  account  given 
of  him  in  the  Bible ;  and  I  form  my  opinion  of  the  Bible 
from  the  wisdom  and  goodness  of  God,  manifested  in  the 
structure  of  the  universe,  and  in  all  the  works  of  the 
Creation.  The  result  in  these  two  cases  will  be,  that 
you,  by  taking  the  Bible  for  your  standard,  will  have  a 
bad  opinion  of  God :  and  I,  by  taking  God  for  my 
standard,  shall  have  a  bad  opinion  of  the  Bible. 

The  Bible  represents  God  to  be  a  changeable,  passion- 


370  AGE   OF   REASON. 

ate  vindictive  being ;  making  a  world,  and  then  drown- 
ing it,  afterwards  repenting  of  what  he  had  done,  and 
promising  not  to  do  so  again.  Setting  one  nation  to  cut 
the  throats  of  another,  and  stopping  the  course  of  the  sun 
till  the  butchery  should  be  done.  But  the  works  of  God, 
in  the  Creation,  preach  to  us  another  doctrine.  In  that 
vast  volume  we  see  nothing  to  give  us  the  idea  of  a 
changeable,  passionate,  vindictive  God ;  even,'  thing  we 
there  behold  impresses  us  with  a  contrary'  idea  ;  that  of 
iinchangeableness  and  of  eternal  order,  harmony,  and 
goodness.  The  sun  and  the  seasons  return  at  their 
appointed  time,  and  every  thing  in  the  Creation  pro- 
claims that  God  is  unchangeable.  Now,  which  am  I  to 
believe,  a  book  that  any  impostor  may  make,  and  call 
the  word  of  God ^  or  the  Creation  itself  which  none  but 
an  Almighty  Power  could  make?  for  the  Bible  says  one 
thing,  and  the  Creation  says  the  contrary.  The  Bible 
represents  God  with  all  the  passions  of  a  mortal,  and  the 
Creation  proclaims  him  with  all  the  attributes  of 
a  God. 

It  is  from  the  Bible  that  man  has  learned  cruelty, 
rapine,  and  murder  ;  for  the  belief  of  a  cruel  God  makes 
a  cruel  man.  That  blood-thirsty  man,  called  the  prophet 
Samuel,  makes  God  to  say,  (i  Sam.  chap.  xv.  ver.  3,) 
"Now  go  and  smite  Amalek,  and  utterly  destroy  all 
that  they  have,  and  spare  them  not^  but  slay  both  man 
and  woman,  infant  and  suckling,  ox  and  sheep,  camel 
and  ass. ' ' 

That  Samuel,  or  some  other  impostor,  might  say  this, 
is  what,  at  this  distance  of  time,  can  neither  be  proved 
nor  disproved,  but,  in  my  opinion,  it  is  blasphemy  to  say, 
or  to  believe,  that  God  said  it.  All  our  ideas  of  the 
justice  and  goodness  of  God  revolt  at  the  impious  cruelty 
of  the  Bible.  It  is  not  a  God,  just  and  good,  but  a  devil, 
under  the  name  of  God,  that  the  Bible  describes. 

What    makes   this  pretended    order    to  destroy    the 


AGE   OF   REASON.  37 1 

Amalekites  appear  the  worse,  is  the  reason  given  for  it. 
The  Amalekites  four  hundred  years  before  according  to 
the  account  in  Exodus,  chap.  17,  (but  which  has  the 
appearance  of  fable  from  the  magical  account  it  gives  of 
Moses  holding  up  his  hands,)  had  opposed  the  Israelites 
coming  into  their  country,  and  this  the  Amalekites  had 
a  right  to  do,  because  the  Israelites  were  the  invaders,  as 
the  Spaniards  were  the  invaders  of  Mexico ;  and  this 
opposition  by  the  Amalekites,  at  that  tivie^  is  given  as  a 
reason,  that  the  men,  women,  infants  and  sucklings, 
sheep  and  oxen,  camels  and  asses,  that  were  born  four 
hundred  years  afterwards,  should  be  put  to  death  ;  and  to 
complete  the  horror,  Samuel  hewed  Agag,  the  chief  of 
the  Amalekites,  in  pieces,  as  you  would  hew  a  stick  of 
wood.     I  will  bestow  a  few  observations  on  this  case. 

In  the  first  place,  nobody  knows  who  the  author,  or 
writer,  of  the  book  of  Samuel  was,  and,  therefore,  the 
fact  itself  has  no  other  proof  than  anonymous  or  hearsay 
evidence,  which  is  no  evidence  at  all.  In  the  second 
place,  this  anonymous  book  says,  that  this  slaughter  was 
done  by  the  express  command  of  God:  but  all  our  ideas 
of  the  justice  and  goodness  of  God  give  the  lie  to  the 
book,  and  as  I  never  will  believe  any  book  that  ascribes 
cruelty  and  injustice  to  God,  I,  therefore,  reject  the  Bible 
as  unworthy  of  credit. 

As  I  have  now  given  you  my  reasons  for  believing 
that  the  Bible  is  not  the  word  of  God,  and  that  it  is  a 
falsehood,  I  have  a  right  to  ask  you  your  reasons  ^or 
believing  the  contrary ;  but  I  know  you  can  give  me 
none,  except  that  you  were  educated  to  believe  the  Bible^ 
and  as  the  Turks  give  the  same  reason  for  believing  the 
Koran,  it  is  evident  that  education  makes  all  the  diflfer- 
ence,  and  that  reason  and  truth  have  nothing  to  do  in  the 
case.  You  believe  in  the  Bible  from  the  accident  of 
birth,  and  Turks  believe  in  the  Koran  from  the  same 
accident,  and  each  calls  the  other  infidel. —  But  leaving 


372  AGE  OF   REASON. 

the  prejudice  of  education  out  of  the  case,  the  unprej- 
udiced truth  is,  that  all  are  infidels  who  believe  falsely 
of  God,  whether  they  draw  their  creed  from  the  Bible,  or 
from  the  Koran,  from  the  Old  Testament  or  from 
the  New. 

When  you  have  examined  the  Bible  with  the  attention 
that  I  have  done,  (for  I  do  not  think  you  know  much 
about  it,)  and  permit  yourself  to  have  just  ideas  of  God, 
you  will  most  probably  believe  as  I  do.  But  I  wish  you 
to  know  that  this  answer  to  your  letter  is  not  written  for 
the  purpose  of  changing  your  opinion.  It  is  written  to 
satisfy  you,  and  some  other  friends  whom  I  esteem,  that 
my  disbelief  of  the  Bible  is  founded  on  a  pure  and  reli- 
gious belief  in  God  ;  for,  in  my  opinion,  the  Bible  is  a 
gross  libel  against  the  justice  and  goodness  of  God,  in 
almost  every  part  of  it. 

THOMAS  PAINE. 


SAMUEL    ADAMS. 


f 


LETTER  TO  SAMUEL  ADAMS. 


My  dear  and  venerable  friend  : 

I  received  with  great  pleasure  your  friendly  and  aflfec- 
tionate  letter  of  Nov.  30th,  and  I  thank  you  also  for 
the  frankness  of  it.  Between  men  in  pursuit  of 
truth,  and  whose  object  is  the  happiness  of  man  both  here 
and  hereafter,  there  ought  to  be  no  reserve.  Even  error 
has  a  claim  to  indulgence,  if  not  to  respect,  when  it  is 
believed  to  be  truth.  I  am  obliged  to  you  for  your  affec- 
tionate remembrance  of  what  you  style  my  services  in 
awakening  the  public  mind  to  a  declaration  of  independ- 
ence, and  supporting  it  after  it  was  declared.  I  also, 
like  you,  have  often  looked  back  on  those  times,  and 
have  thought,  that  if  independence  had  not  been  de- 
clared at  the  time  it  was,  the  public  mind  could  not 
have  been  brought  up  to  it  afterwards.  It  will  imme- 
diately occur  to  you,  who  were  so  intimately  acquainted 
with  the  situation  of  things  at  that  time,  that  I  allude  to 
the  black  times  oi  seventy-six ;  for  though  I  know,  and 
you  my  friend  also  know,  they  were  no  other  than  the 
natural  consequences  of  the  military  blunders  of  that 
campaign,  the  country  might  have  viewed  them  as  pro- 
ceeding from  a  natural  inability  to  support  its  cause 
against  the  enemy,  and  have  sunk  undfer  the  despond- 
ency of  that  misconceived  idea.  This  was  the  impres- 
sion against  which  it  was  necessary  the  country  should 
be  strongly  animated. 

1  now  come  to  the  second  part  of  your  letter,  on  which 


374  AGE   OF   REASON. 

I  shall  be  as  frank  with  you  as  you  are  with  me,  "  But 
(say  you)  when  I  heard  you  had  turned  your  mind  to  a 
defence  of  infidelity^  I  felt  myself  much  astonished," 
&c.  What,  my  good  friend,  do  you  call  believing  in 
God  infidelity  ?  for  that  is  the  great  point  mentioned  in 
the  Age  of  Reason  against  all  divided  beliefs  and  alle- 
gorical divinities.  The  Bishop  of  Llandaff  (Dr.  Watson) 
not  only  acknowledges  this,  but  pays  me  some  compli- 
ments upon  it,  in  his  answer  to  the  second  part  of  that 
work.  ' '  There  is  (says  he)  a  philosophical  sublimity  in 
some  of  your  ideas,  when  speaking  of  the  Creator  of  the 
Universe. ' ' 

What  then,  (my  much  esteemed  friend,  for  I  do  not 
respect  you  the  less  because  we  diflfer,  and  that  perhaps 
not  much,  in  religious  sentiments,)  what,  I  ask,  is  the 
thing  called  infidelity  ?  If  we  go  back  to  your  ancestors 
and  mine,  three  or  four  hundred  years  ago,  for  we  must 
have  fathers,  and  grandfathers  or  we  should  not  have 
been  here,  we  shall  find  them  praying  to  saints  and  vir- 
gins, and  believing  in- purgatory  and  transubstantiation  ; 
and  therefore,  all  of  us  are  infidels  according  to  our  fore- 
father's belief.  If  we  go  back  to  times  more  ancient  we 
shall  again  be  infidels  according  to  the  belief  of  some 
other  forefathers. 

The  case,  my  friend,  is,  that  the  world  has  been  over- 
run wuth  fable  and  creed  of  human  invention,  with  sec- 
taries of  whole  nations  against  other  nations,  and 
sectaries  of  those  sectaries  in  each  of  them  against  each 
other.  Every  sectary,  except  the  Quakers,  have  been 
persecutors.  Those  who  fled  from  persecution,  perse- 
cuted in  their  turn,  and  it  is  this  confusion  of  creeds  that 
has  filled  the  <vorld  with  persecution,  and  deluged  it 
with  blood.  Even  the  depredation  on  your  commerce 
by  the  Barbary  powers,  sprang  from  the  crusades  of  the 
church  against  those  powers.  It  was  a  war  of  creed 
against  creed,  each  boasting  of  God  for  its  author,  and 


AGE  OF   REASON.  375 

Tcviliug  each  other  with  the  uameof  infidel.  If  I  do  not 
believe  as  >ou  believe,  it  proves  that  you  do  not  believe 
as  1  believe,  and  this  is  all  that  it  proves. 

There  is,  however,  one  point  of  union  wherein  all 
religions  meet,  and  that  is  in  the  first  article  of  every 
man's  creed,  and  of  every  nation's  creed,  that  has  any 
creed  at  all,  J  believe  in  God.  Those  who  rest  here,  and 
there  are  millions  who  do,  cannot  be  wrong  as  far  as 
their  creed  goes.  Those  who  chose  to  go  further  may  be 
wrongs  for  it  is  impossible  that  all  caD  be  right,  since 
there  is  so  much  contradiction  among  them.  The  first, 
therefore,  are,  in  my  opinion,  on  the  safest  side. 

1  presume  you  are  so  far  acquainted  with  ecclesiastical 
history  as  to  know,  and  the  bishop  who  has  answered 
me  has  been  obliged  to  acknowledge  the  fact,  that  the 
Books  that  compose  the  New  Testament,  were  voted  by 
yeas  and  nays  to  be  the  Word  of  God,  as  you  now  vote  a 
law,  by  the  Popish  Councils  of  Nice  and  Laodocia,  about 
fourteen  hundred  and  fifty  years  ago.  With  respect  to 
the  fact  there  is  no  dispute,  neither  do  I  mention  it  for 
the  sake  of  controversy.  This  vote  may  appear  author- 
ity enough  to  .some,  and  not  authority  enough  to  others. 
It  is  proper,  however,  that  every  body  should  know  the 
fact. 

With  respect  to  the  Age  of  Reason^  which  you  so 
much  condemn,  and  that,  I  believe,  without  having 
read  it,  for  you  say  only  that  you  heard  of  it,  I  will  in- 
form you  of  a  circumstance,  because  you  cannot  know  it 
by  other  means. 

I  have  said  in  the  first  page  of  the  first  part  of  that 
work,  that  it  had  long  been  my  intention  to  publish 
my  thoughts  upon  religion,  but  that  I  had  reserved  it  to 
a  later  time  of  life.  I  have  now  to  inform  you  why  I 
wrote  it,  and  published  it  at  the  time  I  did. 

In  the  first  place,  I  saw  my  life  in  continual  danger. 
My  friends  were  falling  as  fast  as  the  guillotine  could 


376  AGE   OF   REASON. 

cut  their  heads  off,  and  as  I  expected  every  day  the  same 
fate,  I  resolved  to  begin  my  work.  I  appeared  to  myself 
to  be  on  my  death  bed,  for  death  was  on  every  side  of 
me,  and  I  had  no  time  to  lose.  This  accounts  for  my 
writing  at  the  time  I  did,  and  so  nicely  did  the  time  and 
intention  meet,  that  I  had  not  finished  the  first  part  of 
the  work  more  than  six  hours  before  I  was  arrested  and 
taken  to  prison.  Joel  Barlow  was  with  me,  and  knows 
the  fact. 

In  the  second  place,  the  people  of  France  were  running 
headlong  into  atheism,  and  1  had  the  work  translated 
and  published  in  their  own  language,  to  stop  them  in 
that  career,  and  fix  them  to  the  first  article  (as  I  have 
before  said)  of  every  man's  creed,  who  has  any  creed  at 
all,  /  believe  in  God.  I  endangered  my  own  life,  in 
the  first  place,  by  opposing  in  the  Convention  the  exe- 
cuting of  the  king,  and  laboring  to  show  they  were  try- 
ing the  monarch  and  not  the  man,  and  that  the  crimes 
imputed  to  him  were  the  crimes  of  the  monarchial 
system  ;  and  endangered  it  a  second  time  by  opposing 
atheism,  and  yet  j<?w^  of  your  priests,  for  I  do  not  believe 
that  all  are  perverse,  cry  out,  in  the  war-whoop  of  mon- 
archial priest-craft,  what  an  infidel  !  what  a  wicked  man 
is  Thomas  Paine  !  They  might  as  well  add,  for  he  be- 
lieves in  God,  and  is  against  shedding  blood. 

But  all  this  war-whoop  of  the  pulpit  has  some  con- 
cealed object.  Religion  is  not  the  cause,  but  is  the 
stalking  horse.  They  put  it  forward  to  conceal  them- 
selves behind  it.  It  is  not  a  secret  that  there  has  been  a 
party  composed  of  the  leaders  of  the  Federalists,  for  I  do 
not  include  all  Federalists  with  their  leaders,  who  have 
been  working  by  various  means  for  several  years  past,  to 
overturn  the  Federal  Constitution  established  on  the 
representative  system,  and  place  government  in  the  new 
world  on  the  corrupt  system  of  the  old.  To  accomplish 
this  a  large  standing  army  was  necessary,  and  as  a  pre- 


AGE   OF    RKASON. 

tence  for  such  an  army,  the  danger  of  a  foreign  invasion 
must  be  bellowed  forth,  from  the  pulpit,  from  the  press, 
and  by  their  public  orators. 

I  am  not  of  a  disposition  inclined  to  suspicion.  It  is 
in  its  nature  a  mean  and  cowardly  passion,  and  upon  the 
whole,  even  admitting  error  into  the  case,  it  is  better,  I 
am  sure  it  is  more  generous  to  be  wrong  on  the  side  of 
confidence,  than  on  the  side  of  suspicion.  But  I  know 
as  a  fact,  that  the  English  Government  distributes  an- 
nually fifteen  hundred  pounds  sterling  among  the  Pres- 
byterian ministers  in  England,  and  one  hundred  among 
those  of  Ireland  ;*  and  when  I  hear  of  the  strange  dis- 
courses of  some  of  your  ministers  and  professors  of  col- 
leges I  cannot,  as  the  Quakers  say,  find  freedom  in  my 
mind  to  acquit  them.  Their  anti-revolutionary  doctrines 
invite  suspicion,  even  against  one's  will,  and  in  spite  of 
one's  charity  to  believe  well  of  them. 

As  you  have  given  me  one  Scripture  phrase,  I  will 
give  you  another  for  those  ministers.  It  is  said  in 
Exodus,  chapter  xxiii,  verse  28,  "  Thou  shalt  not  revile 
the  Gods,  nor  curse  the  ruler  of  thy  people."  But  those 
ministers,  such  I  mean  as  Dr.  Emmons,  curse  ruler  and 
people  both,  for  the  majority  are,  politically,  the  people, 
and  it  is  those  who  have  chosen  the  ruler  whom  they 
curse. 

As  to  the  first  part  of  the  verse  that  of  not  of  reviling 
the  GodSy  it  makes  no  part  of  my  Scripture  :  I  have  but 
one  God. 

Since  I  began  this  letter,  for  I  write  it  by  piecemeals 
as  I  have  leisure,  I  have  seen  the  four  letters  that  passed 
between  you  and  John  Adams.  In  your  first  letter  you 
say.  "Let  divines  and  philosophers,  statesmen  and 
patriots,  unite  their  endeavors  to  renovate  the  age^  by 

*  A  mistake  in  regard  to  the  amount  said  to  have  been  expended  has  probably  been 
made;  the  sums  intended  to  be  expressed  were  probably  fifteen  hundred  thousand, 
and  one  hundred  thousand  pounds. — Ed. 


AGE  OF  REASON. 

inculating  in  the  minds  of  youth  the  j  ear  and  love  of  the 
Deity  and  universal  philanthropy.''''  Why,  my  dear 
friend,  this  is  exactly  my  religion,  and  is  the  whole  of  it. 
That  you  may  have  an  idea  that  the  Age  of  Reason  (for 
I  believe  you  have  not  read  it)  inculcates  this  reverential 
fear  and  love  of  the  Deity,  I  will  give  you  a  paragraph 
from  it. 

' '  Do  we  want  to  contemplate  his  power  ?  We  see  it 
in  the  immensity  of  the  Creation.  Do  we  want  to  con- 
template his  wisdom  ?  We  see  it  in  the  unchangeable 
order  by  which  the  incomprehensible  whole  is  governed. 
Do  we  want  to  contemplate  his  munificence?  We  see  it 
in  the  abundance  with  which  he  fills  the  earth.  Do  we 
want  to  contemplate  his  mercy?  We  see  it  in  his  not 
withholding  that  abundance  even  from  the  unthankful." 

As  I  am  fully  with  you  in  your  first  part,  that  respect- 
ing the  Deity,  so  am  I  in  your  second,  that  of  universal 
philanthropy  ;  by  which  I  do  not  mean  merely  the  sen- 
timental benevolence  of  wishing  well,  but  the  practical 
benevolence  of  doing  good.  W^e  cannot  serve  the  Deity 
in  the  manner  we  serve  those  who  cannot  do  without 
that  service.  He  needs  no  service  from  us.  We  can 
add  nothing  to  eternity.  But  it  is  in  our  power  to  render 
a  service  acceptable  to  him,  and  that  is,  not  by  praying, 
but  by  endeavoring  to  make  his  creatures  happy.  A 
man  does  not  serve  God  when  he  prays,  for  it  is  himself 
he  is  trying  to  serve  ;  and  as  to  hiring  or  paying  men  to 
pray,  as  if  the  Deity  needed  instruction,  it  is  in  my 
opinion  an  abomination.  One  good  school-master  is 
of  more  use  and  of  more  value  than  a  load  of  such  par- 
sons as  Dr.  Emmons,  and  some  others. 

You,  my  dear  and  much  respected  friend,  are  now  far 
in  the  vale  of  years  ;  I  have  yet,  I  believe,  some  years  in 
store,  for  I  have  a  good  state  of  health  and  a  happy 
mind  :  I  take  care  of  both,  by  nourishing  the  first  with 
temperance,  and  the  latter  with  abundance. 


AGE  OF  REASON.  379 

This  I  believe  you  will  allow  to  be  the  true  philosophy 
of  life.  You  will  see  by  my  third  letter  to  the  citizens 
of  the  United  States,  that  I  have  been  exposed  to,  and 
preserved  through  many  dangers  ;  but,  instead  of  buffet- 
ing the  Deity  with  prayers,  as  if  I  distrusted  him,  or 
must  dictate  to  him,  I  reposed  myself  on  his  protection  : 
and  you,  my  friend,  will  find,  even  in  your  last  moments, 
more  consolation  in  the  silence  of  resignation  than  in  the 
murmuring  wish  of  prayer. 

In  every  thing  which  you  say  in  your  second  letter  to 
John  Adams,  respecting  our  rights  as  men  and  citizens 
in  this  world,  I  am  perfectly  with  you.  On  other  points 
we  have  to  answer  to  our  Creator  and  not  to  each  other. 
The  key  of  heaven  is  not  in  the  keeping  of  any  sect,  nor 
ought  the  road  to  be  obstructed  by  any.  Our  relation  to 
each  other  in  this  world  is,  as  men,  and  the  man  who  is 
a  friend  to  man  and  to  his  rights,  let  his  religious  opin- 
ions be  what  they  may,  is  a  good  citizen,  to  whom  I  can 
give,  as  I  ought  to  do,  and  as  every  other  ought,  the 
right  hand  of  fellowship,  and  to  none  with  more  hearty 
good  will,  my  dear  friend,  than  to  you. 

THOMAS  PAINE. 
Federal  City^  Jan.  /,  180^. 


FROM  A  LETTER  TO  ANDREW  A.  DEAN  * 


Respected  friend  : 

I  RECEIVED  your  friendly  letter,  for  which  I  ant 
obliged  to  you.  It  is  three  weeks  ago  to-day  (Sunday, 
Aug.  15,)  that  I  was  struck  with  a  fit  of  apoplexy,  that 
deprived  me  of  all  sense  and  motion.  I  had  neither 
pulse  nor  breathing,  and  the  people  about  me  supposed 
me  dead.  I  had  felt  exceedingly  well  that  day,  and  had 
just  taken  a  slice  of  bread  and  butter,  for  supper,  and 
was  going  to  bed.  The  fit  took  me  on  the  stairs,  as  sud- 
denly as  if  I  had  been  shot  through  the  head  ;  and  I  got 
so  very  much  hurt  by  the  fall,  that  I  have  not  been  able 
to  get  in  and  out  of  bed  since  that  day,  otherwise  than 
being  lifted  out  in  a  blanket,  by  two  persons  ;  yet  all 
this  while  my  mental  faculties  have  remained  as  perfect 
as  I  ever  enjoyed  them.  I  consider  the  scene  I  have 
passed  through  as  an  experiment  on  dying,  and  I  find 
that  death  has  no  terrors  for  me.  As  to  the  people  called 
Christians,  they  have  no  evidence  that  their  religion  is 
true.t  There  is  no  more  proof  that  the  Bible  is  the 
word  of  God,  than  that  the  Koran  of  Mahomet  is  the 

•  Mr.  Dean  rented  Mr.  Paine's  farm  at  New  Rochelle. 

t  Mr.  Paine's  entering  upon  the  subject  of  religion  on  this  occasion,  it  may  be  pre- 
sumed was  occasioned  by  ihe  following  passage  in  Mr    Dean's  letter  to  him,  viz: 

"  I  have  read  with  good  attention  your  manuscript  on  dreams,  and  examination  on 
the  prophecies  in  the  Bible.  I  am  now  searching  the  old  prophecies,  and  comparing 
the  same  to  those  said  to  be  quoted  in  the  New  Testament.  I  confess  the  comparison 
is  a  matter  worthy  of  our  serious  attention  :  I  know  not  the  result  till  I  finish  ;  then, 
if  Vdii  h •■  'i\  iiiv;    I  shall  communicate  the  same  to  you  ;  I  hope  to  be  with  you  soon." 


AGE  OF  REASON.  38 1 

word  of  God.  It  is  education  makes  all  the  difference. 
Man,  before  he  begins  to  think  for  himself,  is  as  much 
the  child  of  habit  in  Creeds  as  he  is  in  ploughing  and 
sowing.     Yet  creeds,  like  opinions,  prove  nothing. 

Where  is  the  evidence  that  the  person  called  Jesus 
Christ  is  the  begotten  Son  of  God  ?  The  case  admits  not 
of  evidence  either  to  our  senses  or  our  mental  faculties  : 
neither  has  God  given  to  man  any  talent  by  which  such 
a  thing  is  comprehensible.  It  cannot  therefore  be  an 
object  for  faith  to  act  upon,  for  faith  is  nothing  more 
than  an  assent  the  mind  gives  to  something  it  sees  cause 
to  believe  is  fact.  But  priests,  preachers,  and  fanatics, 
put  imagination  in  the  place  of  faith,  and  it  is  the  nature 
of  the  imagination  to  believe  without  evidence. 

If  Joseph  the  carpenter  dreamed,  (as  the  book  of 
Matthew,  chap,  ist,  says  he  did,)  that  his  betrothed 
wife,  Mary,  was  with  child,  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  that 
an  angel  told  him  so  ;  I  am  not  obliged  to  put  faith  in 
his  dream,  nor  do  I  put  any,  for  I  put  no  faith  in  my 
own  dreams,  and  I  should  be  weak  and  foolish  indeed  to 
put  faith  in  the  dreams  of  others. 

The  Christian  religion  is  derogatory  to  the  Creator  in 
all  its  articles.  It  puts  the  Creator  in  an  inferior  point 
of  view,  and  places  the  Christian  Devil  above  him.  It 
is  he,  according  to  the  absurd  story  in  Genesis,  that  out- 
wits the  Creator  in  the  garden  of  Eden,  and  steals  from 
him  his  favorite  cieature,  man,  and  at  last  obliges  him 
to  beget  a  son,  and  put  that  sou  to  death,  to  get  man 
back  again,  and  this  the  priests  of  the  Christian  religion 
call  redemption. 

Christian  authors  exclaim  against  the  practice  of  offer- 
ing up  human  .sacrifices,  which,  they  say,  is  done  in 
some  countries  ;  and  those  authors  make  those  exclama- 
tions without  ever  reflecting  that  their  own  doctrine  of 
salvation  is  founded  on  a  human  sacrifice.  They  are 
saved,   they  say,  by  the  blood  of  Christ.      The  Chris- 


382  AGE   OF   REASON. 

tian  religion  begins  with  a  dream  and  ends  with  a 
murder. 

As  I  am  now  well  enough  to  sit  up  some  hours  in  the 
day,  though  not  well  enough  to  get  up  without  help  ;  I 
employ  myself  as  I  have  always  done,  in  endeavoring  to 
bring  man  to  the  right  use  of  the  reason  that  God  has 
given  him,  and  to  direct  his  mind  immediately  to  his 
Creator,  and  not  to  fanciful  secondary  beings  called  medi- 
ators, as  if  God  was  superannuated  or  ferocious. 

As  to  the  book  called  the  Bible,  it  is  blasphemy  to 
call  it  the  word  of  God.  It  is  a  book  of  lies  and  contra- 
dictions, and  a  history  of  bad  times  and  bad  men.  There 
are  but  a  few  good  characters  in  the  whole  book.  The 
fable  of  Christ  and  his  twelve  apostles,  which  is  a  parody 
on  the  sun  and  the  twelve  signs  of  the  Zodiac,  copied 
from  the  ancient  religions  of  the  Eastern  world,  is  the 
least  hurtful  part.  Ever}'  thing  told  of  Christ  has  refer- 
ence to  the  sun.  His  reported  resurrection  is  at  sunrise, 
and  that  on  the  first  day  of  the  week  ;  that  is,  on  the 
day  anciently  dedicated  to  the  sun,  and  from  thence 
called  Sunday  ;  in  latin  Dies  Solis^  the  day  of  the  sun  ; 
as  the  next  day,  Monday,  is  Moon-day.  But  there  is  no 
room  in  a  letter  to  explain  these  things. 

While  man  keeps  to  the  belief  of  one  God,  his  reason 
unites  with  his  creed.  He  is  not  shocked  with  contra- 
dictions and  horrid  stories.  His  Bible  is  the  heavens 
and  the  earth.  He  beholds  his  Creator  in  all  his  works, 
and  every  thing  he  beholds  inspires  him  with  reverence 
and  gratitude.  From  the  goodness  of  God  to  all,  he 
learns  his  duty  to  his  fellow-man,  and  stands  self- 
reproved  when  he  transgresses  it.  Such  a  man  is  no 
persecutor. 

But  when  he  multiplies  his  creed  with  imaginary 
things,  of  which  he  can  have  neither  evidence  nor  con- 
ception, such  as  the  tale  of  the  garden  of  Eden,  the 
talking  serpent,  the  fall  of  man,  the  dreams  of  Joseph 


AGE  OF   REASON.  383 

the  caqjenter,  the  pretended  resurrection  and  ascension, 
of  which  there  is  even  no  historical  relation,  for  no  his- 
torian of  those  times  mentions  such  a  thing,  he  gets  into 
the  pathless  region  of  confusion,  and  turns  either  frantic 
or  hypocrite.  He  forces  his  mind,  and  pretends  to  be- 
lieve what  he  does  not  believe.  This  is  in  general  the 
case  with  the  Methodists.  Their  religion  is  all  creed  and 
no  morals. 

I  have  now  my  friend  given  you  a  fac  simile  of  my 
mind  on  the  subject  of  religion  and  creeds,  and  my  wish 
is,  that  you  make  this  letter  as  publicly  known  as  you 
find  opportunities  of  doing. 

Yours,  in  friendship, 

THOMAS  PAINE. 
W.  K,  Aug.,  J 806. 


REMARKS  ON  ROBERT  HALL'S  SERMONS.* 


ROBERT  HALL,  a  protestant  minister  in  England, 
preached  and  published  a  sermon  against  what 
he  calls  ^''Modern  infidelity.''''  A  copy  of  it  was 
sent  to  a  gentleman  in  America,  with  a  request  for  his 
opinion  thereon.  That  gentleman  sent  it  to  a  friend  of 
his  in  New  York,  with  the  request  written  on  the  cover 
— and  this  last  sent  it  to  Thomas  Paine,  who  wrote  the 
following  observations  on  the  blank  leaf  at  the  end  of 
the  sermon : 

The  preacher  of  the  foregoing  sermon  speaks  a  great 
deal  about  infidelity^  but  does  not  define  what  he  means 
by  it.  His  harangue  is  a  general  exclamation.  Every 
thing,  I  suppose,  that  is  not  in  his  creed  is  infidelity  with 
liim,  and  his  creed  is  infidelity  with  me.  Infidelity  is 
believing  falsely.  If  what  christians  believe  is  not  true, 
it  is  the  christians  that  are  the  infidels. 

The  point  between  deists  and  christians  is  not  about 
doctrine,  but  about  facts — for  if  the  things  believed  by 
the  christians  to  be  facts,  are  not  facts,  the  doctrine 
founded  thereon  falls  of  itself.  There  is  such  a  book  as 
the  Bible,  but  is  it  a  fact  that  the  Bible  is  revealed  reli- 
gion? The  christians  canot  prove  it  is.  They  put 
tradition  in  place  of  evidence,  and  tradition  is  not  proof. 

*  This,  and  the  following  pieces  are  trotn  the  Pi  aspect,  or  View  of  the  Moral  IVorld, 
a  periodical  work  edited  and  published  by  Elihu  Palmer,  at  New  York,  in  1804. 
The  same  signatures  are  given  as  were  subscribed   to  the  original  communications. 


AGE   OF    REASON.  385 

If  it  were,  the  reality  of  witches  could  be  proved  by  the 
same  kind  of  evidence. 

The  Bible  is  a  history  of  the  times  of  which  it  speaks, 
and  history  is  not  revelation.  The  obscene  and  vulgar 
stories  in  the  Bible  are  as  repugnant  to  our  ideas  of  the 
purity  of  a  divine  Being,  as  the  horrid  cruelties  and 
murders  it  ascribes  to  him,  are  repugnant  to  our  ideas  of 
his  justice.  It  is  the  reverence  of  the  Deists  for  the 
attributes  of  the  Deity,  that  causes  them  to  reject  the 
Bible. 

Is  the  account  which  the  christian  church  gives  of  the 
person  called  Jesus  Christ,  a  fact  or  a  fable?  Is  it  a  fact 
that  he  was  begotten  by  the  Holy  Ghost?  The  christians 
cannot  prove  it,  for  the  case  does  not  admit  of  proof. 
The  things  called  miracles  in  the  Bible,  such,  for 
instance,  as  raising  the  dead,  admitted,  if  trut\  of  ocular 
<lemonstration,  but  the  story  of  the  conception  of  Jesus 
Christ  in  the  womb  is  a  case  beyond  miracle,  for  it  did 
not  admit  of  demonstration.  Mary,  the  reputed  mother 
of  Jesus,  who  must  be  supposed  to  know  best,  never  said 
so  herself,  and  all  the  evidence  of  it  is,  that  the  book  of 
Matthew  says,  that  Joseph  dreamed  an  angel  told  him  so. 
Had  an  old  maid  of  two  or  three  hundred  years  of  age, 
brought  forth  a  child,  it  would  have  been  much  better 
presumptive  evidence  of  a  supernatural  conception,  than 
Matthew's  story  of  Joseph's  dream  about  his  young  wife. 

Is  it  a  fact  that  Jesus  Christ  died  for  the  sins  of  the 
world,  and  how  is  it  proved?  If  a  God  he  could  not  die, 
and  as  a  man  he  could  not  redeem,  how  then  is  this 
redemption  proved  to  be  a  fact?  It  is  said  that  Adam 
eat  of  the  forbidden  fruit,  commonly  called  an  apple, 
and  thereby  subjected  himself  and  all  his  posterity  for- 
ever to  eternal  damnation.  This  is  worse  than  visiting 
the  sins  of  the  fathers  upon  the  children  unto  the  third 
und  fourth  generations.  But  how  was  the  death  of  Jesus 
Christ  to  affect  or  alter  the  case? — Did  God  thirst  for 


386  AGE   OF   REASON. 

blood  ?  If  SO,  would  it  not  have  been  better  to  have 
crucified  Adam  at  once  upon  the  forbidden  tree,  and  made 
a  new  man?  Would  not  this  have  been  more  creator- 
like than  repairing  the  old  one?  Or,  did  God,  when  he 
made  Adam,  supposing  the  story  to  be  true,  exclude 
himself  from  the  right  of  making  another?  or  impose 
on  himself  the  necessity  of  breeding  from  the  old  stock? 
Priests  should  first  prove  facts,  and  deduce  doctrines 
from  them  afterwards.  But,  instead  of  this,  they  assume 
every  thing  and  prove  nothing.  Authorities  drawn 
from  the  Bible  are  no  more  than  authorities  drawn  from 
other  books,  unless  it  can  be  proved  that  the  Bible  is 
revelation. 

This  story  of  the  redemption  will  not  stand  examina- 
tion. That  man  should  redeem  himself  from  the  sin  of 
eating  an  apple,  by  committing  a  murder  on  Jesus  Christ, 
is  the  strangest  system  of  religion  ever  set  up.  Deism 
is  perfect  purity  compared  with  this.  It  is  an  established 
principle  with  the  Quakers  not  to  shed  blood — suppose, 
then,  all  Jerusalem  had  been  Quakers  when  Christ  lived, 
there  would  have  been  nobody  to  crucify  him,  and  in 
that  case,  if  man  is  redeemed  by  his  blood,  which  is  the 
belief  of  the  church,  there  could  have  been  no  redemp- 
tion—  and  the  people  of  Jerusalem  must  all  have  been 
damned,  because  they  were  too  good  to  commit  murder. 
The  christian  system  of  religion  is  an  outrage  on  common 
sense.     Why  is  man  afraid  to  think? 

Why  do  not  the  christians,  to  be  consistent,  make 
saints  of  Judas  and  Pontius  Pilate  ?  for  they  were  the 
persons  who  accomplished  the  act  of  salvation.  The 
merit  of  a  sacrifice,  if  there  can  be  any  merit  in  it,  was 
never  in  the  thing  sacrificed,  but  in  the  persons  offering 
up  the  sacrifice — and,  therefore,  Judas  and  Pontius 
Pilate  ought  to  stand  first  on  the  calendar  of  saints. 

THOMAS   PAINE. 


OF  THE  WORD  RELIGION, 

AND  OTHER  WORDS  OF  UNCERTAIN  SIGNIFICATION. 


THE  word  religion  is  a  word  of  forced  application 
when  used  with  respect  to  the  worship  of  God. 
The  root  of  the  word  is  the  latin  verb  ligo^  to  tie 
or  bind.  From  ligo^  comes  religo^  to  tie  or  bind  over 
again,  or  make  more  fast — from  religo^  comes  the  sub- 
stantive religo^  which,  with  the  addition  of  n  makes  the 
English  substantive  religion.  The  French  use  the 
word  properly — when  a  woman  enters  a  convent  she  is 
called  a  noviciat^  that  is,  she  is  upon  trial  or  probation. 
When  she  takes  the  oath,  she  is  called  a  religieuse^  that 
is,  she  is  tied  or  bound  by  that  oath  to  the  performance  of  it. 
We  use  the  word  in  the  same  kind  of  sense  when  we  say 
we  will  religiously  perform  the  promise  that  we  make. 

But  the  word,  without  referring  to  its  etymology',  has, 
in  the  manner  it  is  used,  no  definitive  meaning,  because 
it  does  not  designate  what  religion  a  man  is  of.  There 
is  the  religion  of  the  Chinese,  of  the  Tartars,  of  the 
Bramins,  of  the  Persians,  of  the  Jews,  of  the  Turks,  etc. 

The  word  Christianity  is  equally  as  vague  as  the  word 
religion.  No  two  sectaries  can  agree  what  it  is.  It  is  a 
lo  herea.n6.  lo  there.  The  two  principal  sectaries.  Papists 
and  Protestants,  have  often  cut  each  other's  throats  about 
it : — The  Papists  call  the  Protestants  heretics,  and  the 
Protestants  call  the  Papists  idolaters.  The  minor 
sectaries  have  shown  the  same  spirit  of  rancor,  but,  as 


388  AGE   OF   REASON. 

the  civil  law  restrains  them  from  blood,  they  content 
themselves  with  preaching  damnation  against  each  other. 

The  word  protestant  has  a  positive  signification  in  the 
sense  it  is  used.  It  means  protesting  against  the  authority 
of  the  Pope,  and  this  is  the  only  article  in  which  the  pro- 
testants  agree.  —  In  every  other  sense,  with  respect  to 
religion,  the  word  protestant  is  as  vague  as  the  word 
christian.  When  we  say  an  Episcopalian,  a  Presbyterian, 
a  Baptist,  a  Quaker,  we  know  what  those  persons  are, 
and  what  tenets  they  hold — but  when  we  say  a  christian, 
we  know  he  is  not  a  Jew  nor  a  Mahometan,  but  we  know 
not  if  he  be  a  trinitarian  or  an  anti-trinitarian,  a  believer 
in  what  is  called  the  immaculate  conception,  or  a  dis- 
believer, a  man  of  seven  sacraments,  or  of  two  sacra- 
ments, or  of  none.  The  word  christian  describes  what 
a  man  is  not,  but  not  what  he  is. 

The  word  Theology^  from  Theos^  the  Greek  word  for 
God,  and  meaning  the  study  and  knowledge  of  God,  is  a 
word,  that  strictly  speaking,  belongs  to  Theists  or  Deists, 
and  not  to  the  christians.  The  head  of  the  christian 
church  is  the  person  called  Christ — but  the  head  of  the 
church  of  the  Theists,  or  Deists,  as  they  are  more 
commonly  called,  from  Deus^  the  latin  word  for  God,  is 
God  himself,  and  therefore  the  word  Theology  belongs  to 
that  church  which  has  Theos,  or  God,  for  its  head,  and 
not  to  the  christian  church  which  has  the  person  called 
Christ  for  its  head.  Their  technical  word  is  Christianity, 
and  they  cannot  agree  what  Christianity  is. 

The  words  revealed  religion,  and  natural  religion, 
require  also  explanation.  They  are  both  invented  terms, 
contrived  by  the  church  for  the  support  of  priestcraft. 
With  respect  to  the  first,  there  is  no  evidence  of  any  such 
thing,  except  in  the  universal  revelation  that  God  ha& 
made  of  his  power,  his  wisdom,  his  goodness  in  the  struc- 
ture of  the  universe,  and  in  all  the  works  of  creation. 
We  have  no  cause  or  ground  from  any  thing  we  behol  i 


AGE   OF   REASON.  389 

in  those  works,  to  suppose  God  would  deal  partially  by 
mankind,  and  reveal  knowledge  to  one  nation  and  with- 
hold it  from  another,  and  then  damn  them  for  not  know- 
ing it.  The  sun  shines  an  equal  quantity  of  light  all 
over  the  world — and  mankind  in  all  ages  and  countries 
are  endued  with  reason,  and  blessed  with  sight,  to 
read  the  visible  works  of  God  in  the  creation,  and  so 
intelligent  is  this  book  that  he  that  runs  may  read.  We 
admire  the  wisdom  of  the  ancients,  yet  they  had  no 
bibles,  nor  books,  called  revelation.  They  cultivated  the 
reason  that  God  gave  them,  studied  him  in  his  works, 
and  arose  to  eminence. 

As  to  the  Bible,  whether  true  or  fabulous,  it  is  a 
history,  and  history  is  not  revelation.  If  Solomon  had 
seven  hundred  wi\'es,  and  three  hundred  concubines,  and 
if  Samson  slept  in  Delilah's  lap,  and  she  cut  his  hair  off, 
the  relation  of  those  things  is  mere  history,  that  needed 
no  revelation  from  heaven  to  tell  it ;  neither  does  it  need 
any  revelation  to  tell  us  that  Samson  was  a  fool  for  his 
pains,  and  Solomon  too. 

As  to  the  expressions  so  often  used  in  the  Bible,  that 
the  word  of  the  Lord  came  to  such  an  one,  or  such  an 
one,  it  was  the  fashion  of  speaking  in  those  times,  like 
the  expression  used  by  a  Quaker,  that  the  spirit  moveth 
him^  or  that  used  by  priests,  that  they  have  a  call.  We 
ought  not  to  be  deceived  by  phrases  because  they  are 
ancient.  But  if  we  admit  the  supposition  that  God 
would  condescend  to  reveal  himself  in  words,  we  ought 
not  to  believe  it  would  be  in  such  idle  and  profligate 
stories  as  are  in  the  Bible,  and  it  is  for  this  reason,  among 
others  which  our  reverence  to  God  inspires,  that  the 
Deists  deny  that  the  book  called  the  Bible  is  the  word 
of  God,  or  that  it  is  revealed  religion. 

With  respect  to  the  term  natural  religion,  it  is,  upon 
the  face  of  it,  the  opposite  of  artificial  religion,  and  it  is 
impossible  for  any  man  to  be  certain  that  what  is  called 


390  AGE   OF   REASON. 

revealed  religion^  is  not  artificial.  Man  has  the  power 
of  making  books,  inventing  stories  of  God,  and  calling 
them  revelation,  or  the  word  of  God.  The  Koran  exists 
as  an  instance  that  this  can  be  done,  and  we  must  be 
credulous  indeed  to  suppose  that  this  is  the  only  instance, 
and  Mahomet  the  only  impostor.  The  Jews  could  match 
him,  and  the  church  of  Rome  could  overmatch  the  Jews. 
The  Mahometans  believe  the  Koran,  the  Christians 
believe  the  Bible,  and  it  is  education  makes  all  the 
difference. 

Books,  whether  Bibles  or  Korans,  carry  no  evidence 
of  being  the  work  of  any  other  power  than  man.  It  is 
only  that  which  man  cannot  do  that  carries  the  evidence 
of  being  the  work  of  a  superior  power.  Man  could  not 
invent  and  make  a  universe — he  could  not  invent  nature, 
for  nature  is  of  divine  origin.  It  is  the  laws  by  which 
the  universe  is  governed.  When,  therefore,  we  look 
through  nature  up  to  nature's  God,  we  are  in  the  right 
road  of  happiness,  but  when  we  trust  to  books  as  the 
word  of  God,  and  confide  in  them  as  revealed  religion, 
we  are  afloat  on  the  ocean  of  uncertainty,  and  shatter 
into*  contending  factions.  The  term  therefore,  natural 
religioti^  explains  itself  to  be  divine  religion,  and  the  term 
revealed  religion  involves  in  it  the  suspicion  of  being 
artificial. 

To  show  the  necessity  of  understanding  the  meaning 
of  words,  I  will  mention  an  instance  of  a  minister,  I 
believe  of  the  Episcopalian  church  of  Newark,  in  New 
Jersey.  He  wrote  and  published  a  book,  and  entitled  it, 
An  Antidote  to  Deism.  An  antidote  to  Deism,  must  be 
Atheism.  It  has  no  other  antidote — for  what  can  be  an 
antidote  to  the  belief  of  a  God,  but  the  disbelief  of  God. 
Under  the  tuition  of  such  pastors,  what  but  ignorance 
and  false  information  can  be  expected  ? 

T.  P. 


OF    CAIN   AND    ABEL. 


THE  story  of  Cain  and  Abel  is  told  in  the  fourth 
chapter  of  Genesis ;  Cain  was  the  elder  brother, 
and  Abel  the  younger,  and  Cain  killed  Abel. 
The  Eg^'ptian  story  of  Typhon  and  Osiris,  and  the  Jewish 
story,  in  Genesis,  of  Cain  and  Abel,  have  the  appearance 
of  being  the  same  story  differently  told,  and  that  it  came 
originally  from  Egypt. 

In  the  Egyptian  story,  Typhon  and  Osiris  are  brothers  ; 
Typhon  is  the  elder,  and  Osiris  the  younger,  and  Typhon 
kills  Osiris.  The  story  is  an  allegory  on  darkness  and 
light ;  Typhon,  the  elder  brother,  is  darkness,  because 
darkness,  was  supposed  to  be  more  ancient  than  light : 
Osiris  is  the  good  light  who  rules  during  the  summer 
months,  and  brings  forth  the  fruits  of  the  earth,  and  is 
the  favorite,  as  Abel  is  said  to  have  been,  for  which 
Typhon  hates  him ;  and  when  the  winter  comes,  and 
cold  and  darkness  overspread  the  earth,  Typhon  is 
represented  as  having  killed  Osiris  out  of  malice,  as  Cain 
is  said  to  have  killed  Abel. 

The  two  stories  are  alike  in  their  circumstances  and 
their  event,  and  are  probably  but  the  same  story ;  what 
corroborates  this  opinion,  is,  that  the  fifth  chapter  of 
Genesis  historically  contradicts  the  reality  of  the  story  of 
Cain  and  Abel  in  the  fourth  chapter,  for  though  the 
name  of  Seth^  a  son  of  Adam,  is  mentioned  in  the  fourth 
chapter,  he  is  spoken  of  in  the  fifth  chapter  as  if  he  was 
the  first  born  of  Adam.     The  chapter  begins  thus  : — 


392  AGE   OF   REASON. 

* '  This  is  the  book  of  \.\\q generations  of  Adam.  In  the 
day  that  God  created  man,  in  the  likeness  of  God  created 
he  him.  Male  and  female  created  he  them,  and  blessed 
them,  and  called  their  name  Adam  in  the  day  when  they 
were  created.  And  Adam  lived  an  hundred  and  thirty 
years  and  begat  a  son,  in  his  own  likeness  and  after  his 
own  image,  and  called  his  name  Seth^  The  rest  of  the 
chapter  goes  on  with  the  genealogy. 

Any  body  reading  this  chapter,  cannot  suppose  there 
were  any  sons  born  before  Seth.  The  chapter  begins 
with  what  is  called  the  creation  of  Adam^  and  calls  itseli 
the  book  of  the  generations  of  Adam^  yet  no  mention  is 
made  of  such  persons  as  Cain  and  Abel :  one  thing,  how- 
ever, is  evident  on  the  face  of  these  two  chapters,  which 
is,  that  the  same  person  is  not  the  writer  of  both  ;  the 
most  blundering  historian  could  not  have  committed 
himself  in  such  a  manner. 

Though  I  look  on  every  thing  in  the  first  ten  chapters 
of  Genesis  to  be  fiction,  yet  fiction  historically  told  should 
be  consistent,  whereas  these  two  chapters  are  not.  The 
Cain  and  Abel  of  Genesis  appear  to  be  no  other  than  the 
ancient  Egyptian  story  of  Typhon  and  Osiris — the  dark- 
ness and  the  light — which  answered  very  well  as  an 
allegory  without  being  believed  as  a  fact. 


THE  TOWER  OF  BABEL. 


THE  story  of  the  Tower  of  Babel  is  told  in  the 
eleventh  chapter  of  Genesis.  It  begins  thus : — 
'*  A.nd  the  whole  earth  (it  was  but  a  very  little  part 
of  it  they  knew)  was  of  one  language  and  of  one  speech. 
— And  it  came  to  pass  as  they  journeyed  from  the  east, 
tliat  they  found  a  plain  in  the  land  of  Shiner,  and  they 
dwelt  there.  — And  they  said  one  to  another  Go  to^  let  us 
make  brick  and  burn  them  thoroughly,  and  they  had 
brick  for  stone,  and  slime  had  they  for  mortar. — And 
they  said^^  to^  let  us  build  us  a  city,  and  a  tower  whose  top 
may  reach  unto  heaven,  and  let  us  make  us  a  name,  lest 
we  be  scattered  abroad  upon  the  face  of  the  whole  earth. 
— And  the  Lord  came  down  to  see  the  city  and  the  tower 
which  the  children  of  men  builded. — And  the  Lord  said, 
behold  the  people  is  one,  and  they  have  all  one  language, 
and  this  they  begin  to  do,  and  now  nothing  will  be 
restrained  from  them  which  they  have  imagined  to  do. — 
Go  tOy  let  us  go  down  and  there  confound  their  language, 
that  they  may  not  understand  one  another's  speech. — So 
(that  is,  by  that  means)  the  Lord  scattered  them  abroad 
from  thence  upon  the  face  of  all  the  earth,  and  they  left 
oflf  building  the  city." 

This  is  the  story,  and  a  foolish  inconsistent  story  it  is. 
In  the  first  place,  the  familiar  and  irreverent  manner  in 
which  the  Almighty  is  spoken  of  in  this  chapter,  is  offen- 
sive to  a  serious  mind.  As  to  the  project  of  building  a 
tower  whose  top  should  reach  to  heaven,  there  never  could 
be  a  people  so  foolish  as  to  have  such  a  notion  ;  but  to 
represent  the  Almighty  as  jealous  of  the  attempt,  as  the 


394  ^^^   OF    REASON, 

writer  of  the  story  has  done,  is  adding  profanation  to 
folly.  ^^Go  ^o,""  says  the  builders,  "let  us  build  us  a 
tower  whose  top  shall  reach  to  heaven. "  "  G^<?  /<9, "  says 
God,  "let  us  go  down  and  confound  their  language." 
This  quaintness  is  indecent,  and  the  reason  given  for  it  is 
worse,  for,  "now  nothing  will  be  restrained  from  them 
which  they  have  imagined  to  do."  This  is  representing 
the  Almighty  as  jealous  of  their  getting  into  heaven. 
The  story  is  too  ridiculous,  even  as  a  fable,  to  account 
for  the  diversity  of  languages  in  the  world,  for  which  it 
seems  to  have  been  intended. 

As  to  the  project  of  confounding  their  language  for  the 
purpose  of  making  them  separate,  it  is  altogether  incorr- 
sistent ;  because,  instead  of  producing  this  effect,  it 
would,  by  increasing  their  difficulties,  render  them  more 
necessary  to  each  other,  and  cause  them  to  keep  together. 
Where  could  they  go  to  better  themselves? 

Another  observation  upon  this  story  is,  the  incon- 
sistency of  it  with  respect  to  the  opinion  that  the  Bible 
is  the  word  of  God  given  for  the  information  of  mankind  ; 
for  nothing  could  so  effectually  prevent  such  a  word 
being  known  by  mankind  as  confounding  their  language. 
The  people,  who  after  this  spoke  different  languages, 
could  no  more  understand  such  a  word  generally,  than 
the  builders  of  Babel  could  understand  one  another.  It 
would  have  been  necessary,  therefore,  had  such  word 
ever  been  given  or  intended  to  be  given,  that  the  whole 
earth  should  be,  as  they  say  it  was  at  first,  of  one  language 
and  of  one  speech,  and  that  it  should  never  have  been 
confounded. 

The  case,  however,  is,  that  the  Bible  will  not  bear 
examination  in  any  part  of  it,  which  it  would  do  if  it  was 
the  word  of  God.  Those  who  most  believe  it  are  those 
who  know  least  about  it,  and  priests  always  take  care  to 
keep  the  inconsistent  and  contradictory  parts  out  of 
sight.  T.  P. 


TO    MEMBERS    OF    THE    SOCIETY    STYLING 
ITSELF  THE  MISSIONARY  SOCIETY. 


The  New  York  Gazette  of  the  i6th  (August)  contains  the 
following  article  — "  On  Tuesday,  a  committee  of  the  Mis- 
sionary Society,  consisting  chiefly  of  distinguished  Clergy- 
men, had  an  interview  at  the  City  Hotel,  with  the  chiefs  of 
the  Osage  tribe  of  Indians,  now  in  this  city,  {New  York)  to 
whom  they  presented  a  Bible,  together  with  an  Address,  the 
object  of  which  was,  to  inform  them  that  this  good  book  con- 
tained the  will  and  laws  of  the  Great  Spirit." 


IT  is  to  be  hoped  some  humane  person  will,  on  ac- 
coimt  of  our  people  on  the  frontiers,  as  well  as  of 
the  Indians,  undeceive  them  with  respect  to  the 
present  the  Missionaries  have  made  them,  and  which 
they  call  a  good  book^  containing,  they  say,  the  will  and 
laws  of  the  GREAT  Spirit.  Can  those  Missionaries 
suppose  that  the  assassination  of  men,  women,  and 
children,  and  sucking  infants,  related  in  the  books  as- 
cribed to  Moses,  Joshua,  &c.,  and  blasphemously  said  to 
be  done  by  the  command  of  the  Lord,  the  Great  Spirit, 
can  be  edifying  to  our  Indian  neighbors,  or  advantageous 
to  us?  Is  not  the  Bible  warfare  the  same  kind  of  war- 
fare as  the  Indians  themselves  carr}'  on,  that  of  indis- 
criminate destruction,  and  against  which  humanity 
shudders?  Can  the  horrid  examples  and  vulgar  obscenity, 
with  which  the  Bible  abounds,  improve  the  morals  or 
civilize  the  manners  of  the  Indians  ?     Will  they  learn 


396  AGE   OF   REASON. 

sobriety  and  decency  from  drunken  Noah  and  beastly 
Lot ;  or  will  their  daughters  be  edified  by  the  example 
of  Lot's  daughters?  Will  the  prisoners  they  take  in 
war  be  treated  the  better  by  their  knowing  the  horrid 
story  of  Samuel's  hewing  Agag  in  pieces  like  a  block  of 
wood,  or  David's  putting  them  under  harrows  of  iron? 
Will  not  the  shocking  accounts  of  the  destruction  of  the 
Canaanites,  when  the  Israelites  invaded  their  country, 
suggest  the  idea  that  we  may  serve  them  in  the  same 
manner,  or  the  accounts  stir  them  up  to  do  the  like  to 
our  people  on  the  frontiers,  and  then  justify  the  assassin- 
ation by  the  Bible  the  Missionaries  have  given  them  ? 
Will  those  Missionary  Societies  never  leave  off  doing 
mischief? 

In  the  account  which  this  missionary  committee  give 
of  their  interview,  they  make  the  chief  of  the  Indians  to 
say,  that,  ' '  as  neither  he  nor  his  people  could  read  it, 
he  begged  that  some  good  white  man  might  be  sent  to 
instruct  them." 

It  is  necessary  the  General  Government  keep  a  strict 
eye  over  those  Missionary  Societies,  who,  under  the  pre- 
tence of  instructing  the  Indians,  send  spies  into  their 
country  to  find  out  the  best  lands.  No  society  should  be 
permitted  to  have  intercourse  with  the  Indian  tribes,  nor 
send  any  person  among  them,  but  with  the  knowledge 
and  consent  of  the  Government.  The  present  adminis- 
tration has  brought  the  Indians  into  a  good  disposition, 
and  is  improving  them  in  the  moral  and  civil  comforts  of 
life  ;  but  if  these  self-created  societies  be  suffered  to  in- 
terfere, and  send  their  speculating  Missionaries  among 
them,  the  laudable  object  of  government  will  be  defeated. 
Priests,  we  know,  are  not  remarkable  for  doing  anything 
gratis  ;  they  have  in  general  some  scheme  in  every  thing 
they  do,  either  to  impose  on  the  ignorant,  or  derange  the 
operations  of  government. 

A  Friend  to  the  Indians. 


OF  THE  RELIGION  OF  DEISM 

COMPARED  WITH   THE  CHRISTIAN   RELIGION,    AND  THE 
SUPERIORITY  OF  THE   FORMER   OVER  THE   LATTER. 


EVERY  person,  of  whatever  religious  denomination 
lie  may  be,  is  a  Deist  in  the  first  article  of  his 
Creed,     Deism,  from  the  Latin  word  Deus^  God, 
is  the  belief  of  a  God,  and  this  belief  is  the  first  article  of 
every  man's  creed. 

It  is  on  this  article,  universally  consented  to  by  all 
mankind,  that  the  Deist  builds  his  church,  and  here  he 
rests.  Whenever  we  step  aside  from  this  article,  by 
rnixing  it  with  articles  of  human  invention,  we  wander 
into  a  labyrinth  of  uncertainty  and  fable,  and  become 
exposed  to  every  kind  of  imposition  by  pretenders  to 
revelation.  The  Persian  shows  the  Zendavista  of 
Zoroaster,  the  law-giver  of  Persia,  and  calls  it  the  divine 
law ;  the  Bramin  shows  the  Shaster^  revealed,  he  says, 
by  God  to  Brama,  and  given  to  him  out  of  a  cloud ;  the 
Jew  shows  what  he  calls  the  law  of  Moses,  given,  he 
says,  by  God,  on  the  Moimt  Sinai ;  the  Christian  shows 
a  collection  of  books  and  epistles,  written  by  nobody 
knows  who,  and  called  the  New  Testmnent ;  and  the 
Mahometan  shows  the  Koran,  given,  he  says,  by  God  to 
Mahomet  :  each  of  these  calls  itself  revealed  reliorion 
and  the  only  true  word  of  God,  and  this  the  followers  of 
each  profess  to  believe  from  the  habit  of  education,  and 
each  believes  the  others  are  imposed  upon. 

But  when  the  divine  gift  of  reason  begins  to  expand 
itself  in  the  mind  and  calls  man  to  reflection,  he  then 


398  AGE   OF   REASON. 

reads  and  contemplates  God  in  his  works,  and  not  in  the 
books  pretending  to  be  revelation.  The  Creation  is  the 
Bible  of  the  true  believer  in  God.  Every  thing  in  this 
vast  volume  inspires  him  with  sublime  ideas  of  the 
Creator.  The  little  and  paltry,  and  often  obscene  tales 
of  the  Bible  sink  into  wretchedness  when  put  in  com- 
parison with  this  mighty  work.  The  Deist  needs  none 
of  those  tricks  and  shows  called  miracles  to  confirm  his 
faith,  for  what  can  be  a  greater  miracle  than  the  creation 
itself  and  his  own  existence? 

There  is  a  happiness  in  Deism,  when  rightly  under- 
stood, that  is  not  to  be  found  in  any  other  system  of 
religion.  All  other  systems  have  some  things  in  them 
that  either  shock  our  reason,  or  are  repugnant  to  it,  and 
man,  if  he  thinks  at  all,  must  stifle  his  reason  in  order 
to  force  himself  to  believe  them.  But  in  Deism  our 
reason  and  our  belief  become  happily  united.  The 
wonderful  structure  of  the  universe,  and  every  thing  we 
behold  in  the  system  of  the  creation,  prove  to  us,  far 
better  than  books  can  do,  the  existence  of  a  God,  and  at 
the  same  time  proclaim  his  attributes.  It  is  by  the 
exercise  of  our  reason  that  we  are  enabled  to  contemplate 
God  in  his  works,  and  imitate  him  in  his  ways.  When 
we  see  his  care  and  goodness  extended  over  all-  his 
creatures,  it  teaches  us  our  duty  towards  each  other, 
while  it  calls  forth  our  gratitude  to  him.  It  is  by 
forgetting  God  in  his  works,  and  running  after  the  books 
of  pretended  revelation  that  man  has  wandered  from  the 
straight  path  of  duty  and  happiness,  and  become  by 
turns  the  victim  of  doubt  and  the  dupe  of  delusion. 

Except  in  the  first  article  in  the  Christian  creed,  that  of 
believing  in  God,  there  is  not  an  article  in  it  but  fills  the 
mind  with  doubt,  as  to  the  truth  of  it,  the  instant  man 
begins  to  think.  Now  every  article  in  a  creed  that  is 
necessary  to  the  happiness  and  salvation  of  man,  ought 
to  be  as  evident  to  the  reason  and  comprehension  of  man 


AGE  OF  REASON.  399 

as  the  first  article  is,  for  God  has  not  given  us  reason  for 
the  purpose  of  confounding  us,  but  that  we  should  use  it 
for  our  own  happiness  and  his  glory. 

The  truth  of  the  first  article  is  proved  by  God  himself, 
and  is  universal  ;  for  the  creation  is  of  itself  demonstra- 
tion of  the  existence  of  a  Creator.  But  the  second  article, 
that  of  God's  begetting  a  son,  is  not  proved  in  like 
manner,  and  stands  on  no  other  authority  than  that  of  a 
tale.  Certain  books  in  what  is  called  the  New  Testament 
tell  us  that  Joseph  dreamed  that  the  angel  told  him  so. 
(Matthew,  chap.  i.  ver.  20.)  "And  behold  the  Angel 
of  the  Lord  appeared  to  Joseph,  in  a  dream,  saying, 
Joseph,  thou  son  of  David,  fear  not  to  take  unto  thee 
Mary  thy  wife,  for  that  which  is  conceived  in  her  is  of 
the  Holy  Ghost."  The  evidence  upon  this  article  bears 
no  comparison  with  the  evidence  upon  the  first  article, 
and  therefore  is  not  entitled  to  the  same  credit,  and 
ought  not  to  be  made  an  article  in  a  creed,  because  the 
evidence  of  it  is  defective,  and  what  evidence  there  is,  is 
doubtful  and  suspicious.  We  do  not  believe  the  first 
article  on  the  authority  of  books,  whether  called  Bibles 
or  Korans,  nor  yet  on  the  visionary  authority  of  dreams, 
but  on  the  authority  of  God's  own  visible  works  in  the 
<?reation.  The  nations  who  never  heard  of  such  books, 
nor  of  such  people  as  Jews,  Christians,  or  Mahometans, 
believe  the  existence  of  a  God  as  fully  as  we  do,  because 
it  is  self  evident.  The  work  of  man's  hands  is  a  proof 
of  the  existence  of  man  as  fully  as  his  personal  appearance 
would  be.  When  we  see  a  watch,  we  have  as  positive 
evidence  of  the  existence  of  a  watch-maker,  as  if  we  saw 
him  ;  and  in  like  manner  the  creation  is  evidence  to  our 
reason  and  our  senses  of  the  existence  of  a  Creator.  But 
there  is  nothing  in  the  works  of  God  that  is  evidence 
that  he  begat  a  son,  nor  any  thing  in  the  system  of 
creation  that  corroborates  such  an  idea,  and,  therefore, 
we  are  not  authorized  in  believing  it. 


400  AGE   OF   REASON. 

But  presumption  can  asfeume  any  thing,  and  therefore 
it  makes  Joseph's  dream  to  be  of  equal  authority  with 
the  existence  of  God,  and  to  help  it  on  calls  it  revelation. 
It  is  impossible  for  the  mind  of  man  in  its  serious 
moments,  however  it  may  have  been  entangled  by  edu- 
cation, or  beset  by  priest-craft,  not  to  stand  still  and 
doubt  upon  the  truth  of  this  article  and  of  its  creed.  But 
this  is  not  all. 

The  second  article  of  the  Christian  creed  having 
brought  the  son  of  Mary  into  the  world,  (and  this  Mary, 
according  to  the  chronological  tables,  was  a  girl  of  only- 
fifteen  years  of  age  when  this  son  was  bom,)  the  next 
article  goes  on  to  account  for  his  being  begotten,  which 
was,  that  when  he  grew  a  man  he  should  be  put  to  death, 
to  expiate,  they  say,  the  sin  that  Adam  brought  into  the 
world  by  eating  an  apple  or  some  kind  of  forbidden  fruit. 

But  though  this  is  the  creed  of  the  church  of  Rome, 
from  whence  the  protestants  borrowed  it,  it  is  a  creed 
which  that  church  has  manufactured  of  itself,  for  it  is 
not  contained  in,  nor  derived  from,  the  book  called  the 
New  Testament.  The  four  books  called  the  Evangelists, 
Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and  John,  which  give,  or  pretend 
to  give,  the  birth,  sayings,  life,  preaching,  and  death  of 
Jesus  Christ,  make  no  mention  of  what  is  called  the  fall 
of  man  ;  nor  is  the  name  of  Adam  to  be  found  in  any  of 
those  books,  which  it  certainly  would  be  if  the  writers  of 
them  believed  that  Jesus  was  begotten,  born,  and  died 
for  the  purpose  of  redeeming  mankind  from  the  sin 
which  Adam  had  brought  into  the  world.  Jesus  never 
speaks  of  Adam  himself,  of  the  Garden  of  Eden,  nor  of 
what  is  called  the  fall  of  man. 

But  the  Church  of  Rome  having  set  up  its  new  religion 
which  it  called  Christianity,  and  invented  the  creed 
which  it  named  the  apostle's  creed,  in  which  it  calls 
Jesus  the  only  son  of  God^  conceived  by  the  Holy  Ghost ^ 
and  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary — things  of  which  it  is  im- 


AGR  OF  REASON.  401 

possible  that  man  or  woman  can  have  any  idea,  and 

consequently  no  belief  but  in  words,  and  for  which  there 
is  no  authority  but  the  idle  story  of  Joseph's  dream  in 
the  first  chapter  of  Matthew,  which  any  designing  im- 
poster  or  foolish  fanatic  might  make.  It  then  manufac- 
tured the  allegories  in  the  book  of  Genesis,  into  fact,  and 
the  allegorical  tree  of  life  and  the  tree  of  knowledge  into 
real  trees,  contrary  to  the  belief  of  the  first  christians, 
and  for  which  there  is  not  the  least  authority  in  any  of 
the  books  of  the  New  Testament ;  for  in  none  of  them 
is  there  any  mention  made  of  such  place  as  the  Garden 
of  Eden,  nor  of  any  thing  that  is  said  to  have  happened 
there. 

But  the  church  of  Rome  could  not  erect  the  person 
called  Jesus  into  a  Saviour  of  the  world  without  making 
the  allegories  in  the  book  of  Genesis  into  fact,  though 
the  New  Testament^  as  before  observed,  gives  no  author- 
ity for  it.  All  at  once  the  allegorical  tree  of  knowledge 
became,  according  to  the  church,  a  real  tree,  the  fruit  of 
it  real  fruit,  and  the  eating  of  it  sinful.  As  priestcraft 
was  always  the  enemy  of  knowledge,  because  priestcraft 
supports  itself  by  keeping  people  in  delusion  and  ignor- 
ance, it  was  consistent  with  its  policy  to  make  the 
acquisition  of  knowledge  a  real  sin. 

The  church  of  Rome  having  done  this,  it  then  brings 
forward  Jesus,  the  son  of  Mary  as  suffering  death  to 
redeem  mankind  from  sin,  which  Adam,  it  says,  had 
brought  into  the  world  by  eating  the  fruit  of  the  tree  of 
knowledge.  But  as  it  is  impossible  for  reason  to  believe 
such  a  story,  because  it  can  see  no  reason  for  it,  nor 
have  any  evidence  of  it,  the  church  then  tells  us  we 
must  not  regard  our  reason  but  must  believe^  as  it  were, 
and  that  through  thick  and  thin,  as  if  God  had  given 
man  reason  like  a  plaything,  or  a  rattle,  on  purpose  to 
make  fun  of  him.  Reason  is  the  forbidden  tree  of  priest- 
craft,  and  may  serve  to  explain   the  allegory  of  the 


402  AGE   OJf   REASON. 

forbidden  tree  of  knowledge,  for  we  may  reasonably 
suppose  the  allegory  had  seme  meaning  and  application 
at  the  time  it  was  invented.  It  was  the  practice  of  the 
eastern  nations  to  convey  their  meaning  by  allegory, 
and  relate  it  in  the  manner  of  fact.  Jesus  followed  the 
same  method,  yet  nobody  ever  supposed  the  allegory  or 
parable  of  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus,  the  prodigal  son, 
the  ten  virgins,  &c. ,  were  facts.  Why  then  should  the 
tree  of  knowledge,  which  is  far  more  romantic  in  idea 
than  the  parables  in  the  New  Testament  are,  be  supposed 
to  be  a  real  tree.  *  The  answer  to  this  is,  because  the 
church  could  not  make  its  new  fangled  system,  which 
it  called  Christianity,  hold  together  without  it.  To  have 
made  Christ  to  die  on  account  of  an  allegorical  tree  would 
have  been  too  bare-faced  a  fable. 

But  the  account,  as  it  is  given  of  Jesus  in  the  New 
Testament^  even  visionar\'  as  it  is,  does  not  support  the 
creed  of  the  church  that  he  died  for  the  redemption  of 
the  world.  According  to  that  account  he  was  crucified 
and  buried  on  the  Friday,  and  rose  again  in  good  health 
on  the  Sunday  morning,  for  we  do  not  hear  that  he  was 
sick.  This  cannot  be  called  dying,  and  is  rather  making 
fun  of  death  than  suffering  it.  There  are  thousands  of 
men  and  women  also,  who  if  they  could  know  they 
should  come  back  again  in  good  health  in  about  thirty- 
six  hours,  would  prefer  such  kind  of  death  for  the  sake 
of  the  experiment,  and  to  know  what  the  other  side  of 
the  grave  was.  Why  then  should  that  which  would  be 
only  a  voyage  of  curious  amusement  to  us  be  magnified 
into  merit  and  suffering  in  him?  If  a  God  he  could  not 
suffer  death,  for  immortality  cannot  die,  and  as  a  man 
his  death  could  be  no  more  than  the  death  of  any  other 
person. 

•  The  remark  of  the  Emperor  Julian,  on  the  story  of  The  Tree  of  Knowledge,  is 
worth  observing.  "  If"  said  he,  "  there  ever  had  been,  or  could  be,  a  Tree  of  Know- 
ledge, instead  of  God  forbidding  man  to  eat  thereof,  it  would  be  that  of  which  he 
would  order  him  to  eat  the  most." 


AGE   OF   REASON.  403 

The  belief  of  the  redemption  of  Jesus  Christ  is  altogether 
an  invention  of  the  church  of  Rome,  not  the  doctrine  of 
the  New  Testament.  What  the  writers  of  the  New 
TVj/^zw^v?/ attempted  to  prove  by  the  story  of  Jesus  is 
the  resurrection  of  the  same  body  from  the  grave^  which 
was  the  belief  of  the  Pharisees,  in  opposition  to  the 
Sadducees  (a  sect  of  Jews)  who  denied  it.  Paul,  who 
was  brought  up  a  Pharisee,  labors  hard  at  this  point,  for 
it  was  the  creed  of  his  own  Pharisaical  church.  The 
fifteenth  chapter  of  ist  Corinthians  is  full  of  supposed 
cases  and  assertions  about  the  resurrection  of  the  same 
body,  but  there  is  not  a  word  in  it  about  redemption. 
This  chapter  makes  part  of  the  funeral  service  of  the 
Episcopal  church.  The  dogma  of  the  redemption  is  the 
fable  of  priestcraft  invented  since  the  time  the  New 
Testament  was  compiled,  and  the  agreeable  delusion  of  it 
suited  with  the  depravity  of  immoral  livers.  When  men 
are  taught  to  ascribe  all  their  crimes  and  vices  to  the 
temptations  of  the  Devil,  and  to  believe  that  Jesus,  by 
his  death,  rubs  all  oflf  and  pays  their  passage  to  heaven 
gratis,  they  become  as  careless  in  morals  as  a  spendthrift 
would  be  of  money,  were  he  told  that  his  father  had 
engaged  to  pay  off  all  his  scores.  It  is  a  doctrine,  not 
only  dangerous  to  morals  in  this  world,  but  to  our 
happiness  in  the  next  world,  because  it  holds  out  such  a 
cheap,  easy,  and  lazy  way  of  getting  to  heaven  as  has  a 
tendency  to  induce  men  to  hug  the  delusion  of  it  to  their 
own  injury. 

But  there  are  times  when  men  have  serious  thoughts, 
and  it  is  at  such  times  when  they  begin  to  think,  that 
they  begin  to  doubt  the  truth  of  the  Christian  Religion, 
and  well  they  may,  for  it  is  too  fanciful  and  too  full  of 
conjecture,  inconsistency,  improbability,  and  irration- 
ality, to  afford  consolation  to  the  thoughtful  man.  His 
reason  revolts  against  his  creed.  He  sees  that  none  of 
its  articles  are  proved,    or  can   be   proved.     He  may 


404  AGK  OF  rp:asox. 

believe  that  such  a  person  as  is  called  Jesus  (for  Christ 
was  not  his  name)  was  born  and  grew  to  be  a  man, 
because  it  is  no  more  than  a  natural  and  probable  case. 
But  who  is  to  prove  he  is  the  son  of  God  —  that  he  was 
begotten  by  the  Holy  Ghost?  Of  these  things  there  can 
be  no  proof;  and  that  which  admits  not  of  proof,  and  is 
against  the  laws  of  probability,  and  the  order  of  nature 
which  God  himself  has  established,  is  not  an  object  for 
belief  God  has  not  given  man  reason  to  embarrass  him, 
but  to  prevent  his  being  imposed  upon. 

He  may  believe  that  Jesus  was  crucified,  because  many 
others  were  crucified,  but  who  is  to  prove  he  was  crucified 
for  the  sins  of  the  world?  This  article  has  no  evidence, 
not  even  in  the  New  Testament ;  and  if  it  had,  where  is 
the  proof  that  the  New  Testament^  in  relating  things 
neither  propable  nor  provable,  is  to  be  believed  as  true? 
When  an  article  in  a  creed  does  not  admit  of  proof  nor  of 
probability,  the  salvo  is  to  call  it  revelation  ;  but  this  is 
only  putting  one  difficulty  in  the  place  of  another,  for  it 
is  as  impossible  to  prove  a  thing  to  be  revelation  as  it  is 
to  prove  that  Mary  was  gotten  with  child  by  the  Holy 
Ghost. 

Here  it  is  that  the  religion  of  Deism  is  superior  to  the 
Christian  religion.  It  is  free  from  all  those  invented  and 
torturing  articles  that  shock  our  reason  or  injure  our 
humanity,  and  with  which  the  Christian  religion  abounds. 
Its  creed  is  pure  and  sublimely  simple.  It  believes  in 
God,  and  there  it  rests.  It  honors  reason  as  the  choicest 
gift  of  God  to  man,  and  the  faculty  by  which  he  is 
enabled  to  contemplate  the  power,  wisdom  and  goodness 
of  the  Creator  displayed  in  the  creation  ;  and  reposing 
itself  on  his  protection,  both  here  and  hereafter,  it  avoids 
all  presumptuous  beliefs,  and  rejects,  as  the  fabulous 
inventions  of  men,  all  books  pretending  to  revelation. 

T.  P. 


THE  SABBATH  DAY  OF  CONNECTICUT. 


The  word  Sabbath,  means  rest,  that  is,  cessation 
from  labor,  but  the  stupid  Blue  Laws*  of  Connecticut 
make  a  labor  of  rest,  for  they  oblige  a  person  to  sit  still 
from  sun-rise  to  sun-set  on  a  Sabbath  day,  which  is  hard 
work.  Fanaticism  made  those  laws,  and  hypocrisy  pre- 
tends to  reverence  them,  for  where  such  laws  prevail 
hypocrisy  will  prevail  also. 

One  of  those  laws  says,  ''No  person  shall  run  on 
a  Sabbath-day,  nor  walk  in  his  garden,  nor  elsewhere, 
but  reverently  to  and  from  meeting."  These  fanatical 
hypocrites  forgot  that  God  dwells  not  in  temples  made 
with  hands,  and  that  the  earth  is  full  of  his  glor}'.  One 
of  the  finest  scenes  and  subjects  of  religious  contempla- 
tion is  to  walk  into  the  woods  and  fields,  and  survey  the 
works  of  the  God  of  the  Creation.  The  wide  expanse  of 
heaven,  the  earth  covered  with  verdure,  the  lofty  forest, 
the  waving  corn,  the  magnificent  roll  of  mighty  rivers, 
and  the  murmuring  melody  of  the  cheerful  brooks,  are 
scenes  that  inspire  the  mind  with  gratitude  and  delight : 
but  this  the  gloomy  Calvinist  of  Connecticut,  must  not 
behold  on  a  Sabbath-day.  Entombed  within  the  walls 
of  his  dwelling,  he  shuts  from  his  view  the  temple  of 
creation.  The  sun  shines  no  joy  to  him.  The  gladden- 
ing voice  of  nature  calls  on  him  in  vain.     He  is  deaf, 

*  The\'  were  called  Blue  Laws  because  they  were  originally  printed  on  blue  paper 


4o6  AGE   OF   REASON. 

dumb,  and  blind  to  every  thing  around  him  that  God  has 
made.     Such  is  the  Sabbath-day  of  Connecticut. 

From  whence  could  come  this  miserable  notion  of 
devotion  ?  It  comes  from  the  gloominess  of  the  Calvin- 
istic  creed.  If  men  love  darkness  rather  than  light, 
because  their  works  are  evil,  the  ulcerated  mind  of  a 
Calvinist,  who  sees  God  only  in  terror,  and  sits  brooding 
over  the  scenes  of  hell  and  damnation,  can  have  no  joy 
in  beholding  the  glories  of  the  creation.  Nothing  in 
that  mighty  and  wondrous  system  accords  with  his  prin- 
ciples or  his  devotion.  He  sees  nothing  there  that  tells 
him  that  God  created  millions  on  purpose  to  be  damned, 
and  that  the  children  of  a  span  long  are  born  to  burn 
forever  in  hell.  The  creation  preaches  a  different  doc- 
trine to  this.  We  there  see  that  the  care  and  goodness 
of  God  is  extended  impartially  over  all  the  creatures  he 
has  made.  The  worm  of  the  earth  shares  his  protection 
equally  with  the  elephant  of  the  desert.  The  grass  that 
springs  beneath  our  feet  grows  by  his  bounty  as  well  as 
the  cedars  of  Lebanon.  Every  thing  in  the  Creation 
reproaches  the  Calvinist  with  unjust  ideas  of  God,  and 
disowns  the  hardness  and  ingratitude  of  his  principles  : 
therefore  he  shuns  the  sight  of  them  on  a  Sabbath- 
day. 

An  Enemy  to  Cant  and  Imposition. 


ANCIENT  HISTORY. 

Hints  towards  inquiring  into  the  truth  of  Ancient  History  ^ 
so  far  as  history  is  connected  with  Systems  of  Religion. 


IT  has  been  customary  to  class  history  into  three  divis- 
ions, distinguished  by  the  names  of  Sacred,  Profane, 
and  Ecclesiastical.    By  the  first  is  meant  the  Bible ; 
by  the  second,  the  histor}'  of  nations — of  men  and  things ; 
and  by  the  third,  the  history  of  the  church  and  priesthood. 

Nothing  is  more  easy  than  to  give  names,  and,  there- 
fore, mere  names  signify  nothing  unless  they  lead  to  the 
discovery  of  some  cause  for  which  that  name  was  given. 
For  example,  Sunday  is  the  name  given  to  the  first  day 
of  the  week,  in  the  English  language,  and  it  is  the  same 
in  the  Latin,  that  is,  it  has  the  same  meaning,  {Dies 
solis,)  and  also  in  the  German,  and  in  several  other 
languages.  Why  then  was  this  name  given  to  that  day? 
Because  it  was  the  day  dedicated  by  the  ancient  world 
to  the  luminary  which  in  English  we  call  the  Sun,  and, 
therefore,  the  day  Sun-day^  or  the  day  of  the  Sun  ;  as  in 
the  like  manner  we  call  the  second  day  Monday,  the  day 
dedicated  to  the  Moon, 

Here  the  name  Sunday^  leads  to  the  cause  of  its  being 
called  so,  and  we  have  visible  evidence  of  the  fact, 
because  we  behold  the  Sun  from  whence  the  name 
comes  ;  but  this  is  not  the  case  when  we  distinguish  one 
pirt  of  history  from  another  by  the  name  of  Sacred.  All 
histories  have  been  written  by  men.  We  have  no  evidence, 
nor  any  cause  to  believe,  that  any  have  been  written  by 
God.  That  part  of  the  Bible  called  the  Old  Testa?nent, 
is  the  history  of  the  Jewish  nation,  from  the  time  of 
Abraham,  which  begins  in  the  nth  chap,  of  Genesis,  to 
the  downfall  of  that  nr.tion  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  is 
no  more  entitled  to  be  called  sacred   than  any  other 


408  AGE   OF   RKASON. 

history.  It  is  altogether  the  contrivance  of  priestcraft 
that  has  given  it  that  name.  So  far  from  its  being 
sacred,  it  has  not  the  appearance  of  being  true  in  many 
of  the  things  it  relates.  It  must  be  better  authority 
than  a  book,  which  any  impostor  might  make  as 
Mahomet  made  the  Koran,  to  make  a  thoughtful  man 
believe  that  the  sun  and  moon  stood  still,  or  that  Moses 
and  Aaron  turned  the  Nile,  which  is  larger  than  the 
Delaware,  into  blood,  and  that  the  Egyptian  magicians 
did  the  same.  These  things  have  too  much  the  appear- 
ance of  romance  to  be  believed  for  fact. 

It  would  be  of  use  to  inquire  and  ascertain  the  time 
when  that  part  of  the  Bible  called  the  Old  Testament 
first  appeared.  From  all  that  can  be  collected  there  was 
no  such  book  till  after  the  Jews  returned  from  captivity 
in  Babylon,  and  that  it  is  the  work  of  the  Pharisees  of 
the  Second  Temple.  How  they  came  to  make  the  19th 
chapter  of  the  2d  book  of  Kings,  and  the  37th  of  Isaiah, 
word  for  word  alike,  can  only  be  accounted  for  by  their 
having  no  plan  to  go  by,  and  not  knowing  what  they 
were  about.  The  same  is  the  case  with  respect  to  the 
last  verses  in  the  2nd  book  of  Chronicles,  and  the  first 
verses  of  Ezra,  they  also  are  word  for  word  alike,  which 
shows  that  the  Bible  has  been  put  together  at  random. 

But  besides  these  things  there  is  great  reason  to  believe 
we  have  been  imposed  upon,  with  respect  to  the  antiquity 
of  the  Bible,  and  especially  with  respect  to  the  books 
ascribed  to  Moses.  Hsrodotus,  who  is  called  the  father 
of  history,  and  is  the  most  ancient  historian  whose  work> 
have  reached  to  our  time,  and  who  travelled  into  Egypt, 
conversed  with  the  priests,  historians,  astronomers,  and 
learned  men  of  that  country,  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining; 
all  the  information  of  it  he  could,  and  who  gives  an 
account  of  the  ancient  state  of  it,  makes  no  mention  of 
such  a  man  as  Moses,  though  the  Bible  makes  him  to 
have  been  the  greatest  hero  there,  nor  of  any  one  circum- 


AGE   OF    REASON.  409.. 

stance  mentioned  in  the  book  of  Exodus,  respecting 
Egypt,  such  as  turning  the  rivers  into  blood,  the  dust 
into  lice,  the  death  of  the  first  born  throughout  all  the 
land  of  Egypt,  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea,  the  drowning 
of  Pharaoh  and  all  his  host,  things  which  could  not 
have  been  a  secret  in  Egypt,  and  must  have  been 
generally  known,  had  they  been  facts  ;  and,  therefore,  as 
no  such  things  were  known  in  Eg\'pt,  nor  any  such  man 
as  Moses,  at  the  time  Herodotus  was  there,  which  is 
about  two  thousand  two  hundred  years  ago,  it  shows  that 
the  account  of  these  things  in  the  books  ascribed  to 
Moses  is  a  made  story  of  later  times,  that  is,  after  the 
return  of  the  Jews  from  the  Babylonian  captivity,  and 
that  Moses  is  not  the  author  of  the  books  ascribed  to  him. 

With  respect  to  the  cosmogony,  or  account  of  the 
creation,  in  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis,  of  the  Garden  of 
Eden  in  the  second  chapter,  and  of  what  is  called  the 
fall  of  man  in  the  third  chapter,  there  is  something  con- 
cerning them  we  are  not  historically  acquainted  with. 
In  none  of  the  books  of  the  Bible,  after  Genesis,  are  any 
of  these  things  mentioned,  or  even  alluded  to.  How  is 
this  to  be  accounted  for?  The  obvious  inference  is,  that 
either  they  were  not  known,  or  not  believed  to  be  facts, 
by  the  writers  of  the  other  books  of  the  Bible,  and  that 
Moses  is  not  the  author  of  the  chapters  where  these 
accounts  are  gfiven. 

The  next  question  on  the  case  is,  how  did  the  Jews  come 
by  these  notions,  and  at  what  time  were  they  written  ? 

To  answer  this  question  we  must  first  consider  what 
the  state  of  the  world  was  at  the  time  the  Jews  began  to 
be  a  people,  for  the  Jews  are  but  a  modern  race  compared 
with  the  antiquity  of  other  nations.  At  the  time  there 
were,  even  by  their  own  account,  but  thirteen  Jews  or 
Israelites  in  the  world,  Jacob  and  his  twelve  sonSy  and 
four  of  these  were  bastards,  the  nations  of  Egypt, 
Chaldea,    Persia,  and  India,  were  great  and  populous. 


4IO  AGE   OF   REASON. 

abounding  in  learning  and  science,  particularly  in  the 
knowledge  of  astronomy,  of  which  the  Jews  were  always 
ignorant.  The  chronological  tables  mention,  that 
eclipses  were  observed  at  Babylon  above  two  thousand 
years  before  the  Christian  era,  which  was  before  there 
was  a  single  Jew  or  Israelite  in  the  world. 

All  those  ancient  nations  had  their  cosmogonies,  that  is, 
their  accounts  how  the  creation  was  made,  long  before 
there  was  such  people  as  Jews  or  Israelites.  An  account 
of  these  cosmogonies  of  India  and  Persia,  is  given  by 
Henry  Lord,  Chaplain  to  the  East  India  Company,  at 
Surat,  and  published  in  London  in  1630.  The  writer  of 
this  has  seen  a  copy  of  the  edition  of  1630,  and  made  ex- 
tracts from  it.  The  work,  which  is  now  scarce,  was 
dedicated  by  Lord  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbur}. 

We  know  that  the  Jews  were  carried  captive  into 
Babylon,  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  remained  in  captivity 
several  years,  when  they  were  liberated  by  Cyrus,  king 
of  Persia.  During  their  captivity  they  would  have  had 
an  opportunity  of  acquiring  some  knowledge  of  the 
cosmogony  of  the  Persians,  or  at  least  of  getting  some 
ideas  how  to  fabricate  one  to  put  at  the  head  of  their  own 
history  after  their  return  from  captivity.  This  will 
account  for  the  cause,  for  some  cause  there  must  have 
been,  that  no  mention  nor  reference  is'  made  to  the 
cosmogony  in  Genesis  in  any  of  the  books  of  the  Bible^ 
supposed  to  have  been  written  before  the  captivity,  nor 
is  the  name  of  Adam  to  be  found  in  any  of  those  books. 

The  books  of  Chronicles  were  written  after  the  return 
of  the  Jews  from  captivity,  for  the  third  chapter  of  the 
first  book  g^ves  a  list  of  all  the  Jewish  kings  from  David 
to  Zedekiah,  who  was  carried  captive  into  Babylon,  and 
to  four  generations  beyond  the  time  of  Zedekiah.  In  the 
first  verse  of  the  first  chapter  of  this  book  the  name  of 
Adam  is  mentioned,  but  not  in  any  book  in  the  Bible 
written  before  that  time,  nor  could  it  be,  for  Adam  and 


AGE  OF   REASON.  411 

Eve  are  names  taken  from  the  cosmogony  of  the  Persians. 
Henry  Lord,  in  his  book,  written  from  Snrat,  and 
dedicated,  as  I  have  already  said,  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  says,  that  in  the  Persian  cosmogony,  the 
name  of  the  first  man  was  Adanioh^  and  of  the  woman 
Hevah^  From  hence  comes  the  Adam  and  Eve  of  the 
book  of  Genesis.  In  the  cosmogony  of  India,  of  which 
I  shall  speak  in  a  future  number,  the  name  of  the  first 
man  was  Pourous^  and  of  the  woman  Parcoutee.  We 
want  a  knowledge  of  the  Sanscrit  language  of  India  to 
understand  the  meaning  of  the  names,  and  I  mention  it 
in  this  place,  only  to  show  that  it  is  from  the  cosmogony 
of  Persia,  rather  than  that  of  India,  that  the  cosmogony 
in  Genesis  has  been  fabricated  by  the  Jews,  who  returned 
from  captivity  by  the  liberality  of  Cyrus,  king  of  Persia. 
There  is,  however  reason  to  conclude,  on  the  authority 
of  Sir  William  Jones,  who  resided  several  years  in  India, 
that  these  names  were  very  expressive  in  the  language 
to  which  they  belonged,  for  in  speaking  of  this  language, 
he  says,  (see  the  Asiatic  Researches,)  "The  Sanscrit 
language,  whatever  be  its  antiquity,  is  of  wonderful 
stucture  ;  it  is  more  perfect  than  the  Greek,  more  copious 
than  the  Latin,  and  more  exquisitely  refined  than  either." 
These  hints,  which  are  intended  to  be  continued,  will 
serve  to  show  that  a  society  for  inquiring  into  the 
ancient  state  of  the  world,  and  the  state  of  ancient 
history,  so  far  as  history  is  connected  with  systems  of 
religion,  ancient  and  modem,  may  become  a  useful  and 
instructive  institution.  There  is  good  reason  to  believe 
we  have  been  in  great  error  with  respect  to  the  antiquity 
of  the  Bible,  as  well  as  imposed  upon  by  its  contents. 
Truth  ought  to  be  the  object  of  every  man  ;  for  without 
truth  there  can  be  no  real  happiness  to  a  thoughtful 
mind,  or  any  assurance  of  happiness  hereafter.  It  is  the 
duty  of  man  to  obtain  all  the  knowledge  he  can,  and 
then  make  the  best  use  of  it.  T.  P. 


TO  MR.  MOORE,  OF  NEW  YORK, 

COMMONLY  CALLED   BISHOP   MOORE. 


1HAVE  read  in  the  newspapers  your  account  of  the 
visit  you  made  to  the  unfortunate  General  Haiiilton, 
and  of  administering  to  him  a  ceremony  of  your 
church  which  you  call  the  Holy  Communion. 

I  regret  the  fate  of  General  Hamilton,  and  I  so  far  hope 
with  you  that  it  will  be  a  warning  to  thoughtless  man  not 
to  sport  away  the  life  that  God  has  given  him  ;  but  with 
respect  to  other  parts  of  your  letter  I  think  it  very 
reprehensible,  and  betrays  great  ignorance  of  what  true 
religion  is.  But  you  are  a  priest,  you  get  your  living 
by  it,  and  it  is  not  your  wordly  interest  to  undeceive 
yourself. 

After  giving  an  account  of  your  administering  to  the 
deceased  what  you  call  the  Holy  Communion,  you  add, 
"  By  reflecting  on  this  melancholy  event  let  the  humble 
believer  be  encouraged  ever  to  hold  fast  that  precious 
faith  which  is  the  only  source  of  true  consolation  in  the 
last  extremity  of  nature.  Let  the  infidel  be  persuaded 
to  abandon  his  opposition  to  the  Gospel." 

To  show  you,  sir,  that  your  promise  of  con.solation 
from  scripture  has  no  foundation  to  stand  upon,  I  will 
cite  to  you  one  of  the  greatest  falsehoods  upon  record. 
And  which  was  given,  as  the  record  says,  for  the  purpose, 
and  as  a  promise,  of  consolation. 

In  the  epistle  called  ''the  First  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the 
Thessalonians, "  (chap,  iv, )  the  writer  consoles  the  Thes- 


AGK   OF   REASON.  413 

salon ians  as  to  the  case  of  their  friends  who  wefe  already 
dead.  He  does  this  by  informing  them,  and  he  does  it 
he  says,  b>-  the  word  of  the  Lord,  (a  most  notorious  false- 
hood,) that  the  general  resurrection  of  the  dead  and  the 
ascension  of  the  living,  will  be  in  his  and  their  days  ; 
that  their  friends  will  then  come  to  life  again  ;  that  the 
dead  in  Christ  will  rise  first. — "Then  WE  (says  he,  v.  17) 
which  are  alive  and  remain  shall  be  caught  up  together 
with  THEM  in  the  clouds^  to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air,  and 
so  shall  we  ever  be  with  the  Lord — wherefore  comfort 
one  another  with  these  words. ' ' 

Delusion  and  falsehood  cannot  be  carried  higher  than 
they  are  in  this  passage.  You,  sir,  are  but  a  novice  in 
the  art.  The  words  admit  of  no  equivocation.  The 
whole  passage  is  in  the  first  person  and  the  present 
tense,  ^ ^  We  -^'hich.  are  alive.'* ^  Had  the  writer  meant  a' 
future  time,  and  a  distant  generation,  it  must  have  been 
in  the  third  person  and  the  future  tense.  "TV/^jwho 
shall  then  be  alive."  I  am  thus  particular  for  the  pur- 
pose of  nailing  you  down  to  the  text,  tliat  you  may  not 
ramble  from  it,  nor  put  other  constructions  upon  the 
words  than  they  will  bear,  which  priests  are  very  apt 
to  do. 

Now,  sir,  it  is  impossible  for  serious  man,  to  whom 
God  has  given  the  divine  gift  of  reason,  and  who 
employs  that  reason  to  reverence  and  adore  the  God 
that  gave  it.  it  is,  I  say,  impossible  for  such  a  man  to  put 
confidence  in  a  book  that  abounds  with  fable  and  false- 
hood as  the  New  Testament  does.  This  passage  is  but  a 
sample  of  what  I  could  give  you. 

You  call  on  those  whom  you  style  '''' infidels,'''*  (and 
they  in  return  might  call  you  an  idolator,  a  worshipper 
of  false  gods,  a  preacher  of  false  doctrine,)  "to  abandon 
their  opposition  to  the  Gospel."  Prove,  sir,  the  Gospel 
to  be  true,  and  the  opposition  will  cease  of  itself;  but 
until  you  do  this  (which  we  know  you  cannot  do)  you 


41 4  AGE   OF   REASON. 

have  no  right  to  expect  they  will  notice  your  call.  If  by 
infidels  you  mean  Deists^  (and  you  must  be  exceedingly 
ignorant  of  the  origin  of  the  word  Deist,  and  know  but 
little  oi Deus^  to  put  that  construction  upon  it,)  you  will 
find  yourself  over-matched  if  you  begin  to  engage  in  a 
controversy  with  them.  Priests  may  dispute  with  priests, 
and  sectaries  with  sectaries,  about  the  meaning  of  what 
they  agree  to  call  scripture,  and  end  as  they  began,  but 
when  you  engage  with  a  Deist  you  must  keep  to  fact. 
Now,  sir,  you  cannot  prove  a  single  article  of  your  reli- 
gion to  be  true,  and  we  tell  you  so  publicly.  Do  it,  if 
you  can.  The  Deistical  article,  the  belief  of  a  God^  with 
which  your  creed  begins,  has  been  borrowed  by  your 
church  from  the  ancient  Deists,  and  even  this  article  you 
dishonor  by  putting  a  dream-begotten  phantom*  which 
you  call  his  son,  over  his  head,  and  treating  God  as  if  he 
was  superannuated.  Deism  is  the  only  profession  of  reli- 
gion that  admits  of  worshipping  and  reverencing  God  in 
purity,  and  the  only  one  on  which  the  thoughtful  mind 
can  repose  with  undisturbed  tranquillity.  God  is  almost 
forgotten  in  the  Christian  religion.  Every  thing,  even 
the  creation,  is  ascribed  to  the  son  of  Mary. 

In  religion,  as  in  every  thing  else,  perfection  consists 
in  simplicity.  The  Christian  religion  of  Gods  within 
Gods,  like  wheels  within  wheels,  is  like  a  complicated 
machine  that  never  goes  right,  and  every  projector  in  the 
art  of  Christianity  is  trying  to  mend  it.  It  is  its  defects 
that  liave  caused  such  a  number  and  variety  of  tinkers  to 
be  hammering  at  it,  and  still  it  goes  wrong.  In  the 
visible  world  no  time-keeper  can  go  equally  true  with 
the  sun  ;   and  in  like  manner,  no  complicated  religion 

*Thi«  tirsii  ihapter  of  Matthew  relates  that  Joseph,  the  betrothed  husband  of  Mary, 
dreamed  i  Isai  ;  lie  angel  told  him  that  his  intended  bride  was  with  child  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 
It  is  not  even-  lutsband,  whether  carpenter  or  priest,  that  can  be  so  easily  satisfied,  for  lo  I 
it  was  a  dream.  Whether  Mary  was  in  a  dream  when  this  \sm  done  we  are  not  told.  It 
is,  however,  a  comical  story.    There  i»  no  woman  living  can  iinderotand  it. 


A(rE  OF   REASON.  415 

can  be  equally  true  with  the  pure  and  unmixed  religion 
of  Deism. 

Had  you  not  offensively  glanced  at  a  description  of 
men  whom  you  call  by  a  false  name,  you  would  not  have 
been  troubled  nor  honored  with  this  address;  neither 
has  the  writer  of  it  any  desire  or  intention  to  enter  into 
controversy  with  you.  He  thinks  the  temporal  estab- 
lishment of  your  church  politically  unjust  and  offensively 
unfair ;  but  with  respect  to  religion  itself,  distinct  from 
temporal  establishments,  he  is  happy  in  the  enjoyment 
of  his  own  and  he  leaves  you  to  make  the  best  you  can  of 
yours. 

A  Member  of  the  Deistical  Church. 


TO  JOHN  MASON, 


One  of  the  Ministers  of  the  Scotch  Presbyterian  Church 
of  New  York^  with  remarks  on  his  account  of  the  visit 
he  made  to  the  late  General  Hamilton. 


**/^^OME  now,  let  us  reason  together  saith  the 
\^_^  Lord. ' '  This  is  one  of  the  passages  you  quoted 
from  your  Bible,  in  your  conversation  with 
General  Hamilton,  as  given  in  your  letter,  signed  with 
your  name,  and  published  in  the  Commercial  Advertiser^ 
and  other  New  York  papers,  and  I  re-quote  the  passage 
to  show  that  your  text  and  your  Religion  contradict  each 
other. 

It  is  impossible  to  reason  upon  things  not  comprehen- 
sible by  reason;  and,  therefore,  if  you  keep  to  your  text, 
which  priests  seldom  do,  (for  they  are  generally  either 
above  it,  or  below  it,  or  forget  it,)  you  must  admit  a  reli- 
gion to  which  reason  can  apply,  and  this  certainly  is  not 
the  Christian  Religion. 

There  is  not  an  article  in  the  Christian  religion  that  is 
cognizable  by  reason.  The  Deistical  article  of  your 
religion,  the  belief  of  a  God^  is  no  more  a  Christian 
article,  than  it  is  a  Mahometan  article.  It  is  an  univer- 
sal article,  common  to  all  religions,  and  which  is  held  in 
greater  purity  by  Turks  than  by  Christians ;  but  the 
Deistical  church  is  the  only  one  which  holds  it  in  real 
purity  ;  because  that  church  acknowledges  no  co-partner- 


AGE  OF   REASON.  417 

ship  with  God.  It  believes  in  him  solely ;  and  knows 
nothing  of  Sons,  married  Virgins,  nor  Ghosts.  It  holds 
all  these  things  to  be  the  fables  of  priestcraft. 

Why  then  do  you  talk  of  reason,  or  refer  to  it,  since 
your  religion  has  nothing  to  do  with  reason,  nor  reason 
with  that?  You  tell  people  as  you  told  Hamilton,  that 
they  must  h^iwt  faith!  Faith  in  what?  You  ought  to 
know  that  before  the  mind  can  have  faith  in  any  thing, 
it  must  either  know  it  as  a  fact,  or  see  cause  to  believe  it 
on  the  probability  of  that  kind  of  evidence  that  is  cogniz- 
able by  reason  ;  but  your  religion  is  not  within  either  of 
these  cases ;  for,  in  the  first  place,  you  cannot  prove  it  to 
be  fact ;  and  in  the  second  place,  you  cannot  support  it  by 
reason,  not  only  because  it  is  not  cognizable  by  reason, 
but  because  it  is  contrary  to  reason.  What  reason  can 
there  be  in  supposing,  or  believing,  that  God  put  himself 
to  deaths  to  satisfy  himself  and  be  revenged  on  the  Devil 
on  account  of  Adam;  for  tell  the  story  which  way  you 
will  it  comes  to  this  at  last. 

As  you  can  make  no  appeal  to  reason  in  support  of  an 
unreasonable  religion,  you  then  (and  others  of  your  pro- 
fession) bring  yourselves  off  by  telling  people,  they  must 
not  believe  in  reason  but  in  revelation.  This  is  the  artifice 
of  habit  without  reflection.  It  is  putting  words  in  the 
place  of  things;  for  do  you  not  see  that  when  you  tell 
people  to  believe  in  revelation,  you  must  first  prove 
that  what  you  call  revelation,  is  revelation  ;  and  as  you 
cannot  do  this,  you  put  the  word  which  is  easily  spoken, 
in  the  place  of  the  thing  you  cannot  prove.  You  have 
no  more  evidence  that  your  Gospel  is  revelation,  than 
the  Turks  have  that  their  Koran  is  revelation,  and  the 
only  difference  between  them  and  you  is,  that  they  preach 
their  delusion  and  you  preach  yours. 

In  your  conversation  with  General  Hamilton,  you  say 
to  him,  "The  simple  truths  of  the  Gospel  which  require 
no  abstruse  investigation^  but  faith  in  the  veracity  of 


418  AGE   OF   REASON. 

God^   who  cannot  lie^   are  best  suited   to  your   present 
condition." 

If  those  matters  yon  call  ''''simple  truths^''''  are  what 
you  call  them,  and  require  no  abstruse  investigation, 
they  would  be  so  obvious  that  reason  would  easily  com- 
prehend them ;  yet  the  doctrine  you  preach  at  other 
times  is,  that  the  mysteries  of  the  Gospel  are  beyond  the 
reach  of  reason.  If  your  first  position  be  true,  that  they 
are  simple  truth's,^  priests  are  unnecessary',  for  we  do  not 
want  preachers  to  tell  us  the  sun  shines ;  and  if  your 
second  be  true,  the  case,  as  to  effect,  is  the  same,  for  it 
is  waste  of  money  to  pay  a  man  to  explain  unexplainable 
things,  and  loss  of  time  to  listen  to  him.  That  God  can- 
not lie^  is  no  advantage  to  your  argument,  because  it  is 
no  proof  that  priests  cannot,  or  that  the  Bible  does  not. 
Did  not  Paul  lie  when  he  told  the  Thessalonians  that 
the  general  resurrection  of  the  dead  would  be  in  his  life- 
time, and  that  he  should  go  up  alive  along  with  them 
into  the  clouds  to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air?  i  Thes. 
chap.  4,  verse  27. 

You  spoke  of  what  you  call,  '"Hhe  precious  blood  of 
Christy  This  savage  style  of  language  belongs  to  the 
priests  of  the  Christian  religion.  The  professors  of  this 
religion  say  they  are  shocked  at  the  accounts  of  human 
sacrifices  of  which  they  read  in  the  histories  of  some 
countries.  Do  they  not  see  that  their  own  religion  is 
founded  on  a  human  sacrifice,  the  blood  of  man,  of  which 
their  priests  talk  like  so  many  butchers?  It  is  no  wonder 
the  Christian  religion  has  been  so  bloody  in  its  effects, 
for  it  began  in  blood,  and  many  thousands  of  human 
sacrifices  have  since  been  offered  on  the  altar  of  the 
Christian  religion. 

It  is  necessary  to  the  character  of  a  religion,  as  being 
true,  and  immutable  as  God  himself  is,  that  the  evidence 
of  it  be  equally  the  same  through  all  periods  of  time  and 
circumstance.     This  is  not  the  case  with  the  Christian 


AGE   OF   REASON.  419 

religion,  nor  with  that  of  the  Jews  that  preceded  it,  (for 
there  was  a  time  and  that  within  the  knowledge  of 
history,  when  these  religions  did  not  exist,)  nor  is  it  the 
case  with  any  religion  we  know  of  but  the  religion  of 
Deism.  In  this  the  evidences  are  eternal  and  universal. 
— '"''The  heavens  declare  the  glory  of  God^  and  the  firma- 
ment sheweth  his  handy  work^ — Day  unto  day  utter eth 
speech^  and  night  unto  night  showeth  knowledge.^''*  But 
aJl  other  religions  are  made  to  arise  from  some  local 
circumstance,  and  are  introduced  by  some  temporary' 
trifle  which  its  partisans  call  a  miracle,  but  of  which 
there  is  no  proof  but  the  story  of  it. 

The  Jewish  religion,  according  to  the  history  of  it, 
began  in  a  wilderness^  and  the  Christian  religion  in  a 
stable.  The  Jewish  books  tell  us  of  wouders  exhibited 
upon  mount  Sinai.  It  happened  that  nobody  lived 
there  to  contradict  the  account.  The  Christian  books 
tell  us  of  a  star  that  hung  over  the  stable  at  the  birth  of 
Jesus.  There  is  no  star  there  now,  nor  any  person  living 
that  saw  it.  But  all  the  stars  in  the  heavens  bear  eternal 
evidence  to  the  truth  of  Deism.  It  did  not  begin  in  a 
stable,  nor  in  a  wilderness.  It  began  every  where.  The 
theatre  of  the  universe  is  the  place  of  birth. 

As  adoration  paid  to  any  being  but  God  himself  is 
idolatry,  the  Christian  religion  by  paying  adoration  to  a 
man,  born  of  a  woman,  called  Mary,  belongs  to  the 
idolatrous  class  of  religions,  consequently  the  consolation 
drawn  from  it  is  delusion.     Between  you  and  your  rival 

*Thi(>  PmIiii  (19)  which  ie  n  Deistical  Psalm  is  go  much  in  the  mauuer  of  some  parts 
of  the  book  of  Job,  (which  i!<  not  a  book  of  tlie  Jews,  and  does  not  belong  to  the  bible,) 
that  it  has  the  appearance  of  havin<;  l)een  translated  into  Hebrew  from  the  same  language 
in  which  the  liook  of  Job  was  originally  written,  and  brought  by  the  Jews  from  Chaldea  or 
Persia,  when  they  reinme<l  from  captivity.  The  contemplation  of  the  Heavens  made  a 
great  part  of  the  reli>:ion8  devotion  of  the  Cliaideans  atid  Persians,  and  their  religious 
fcBtivals  were  reuuiated  by  the  progress  of  the  sun  through  the  twelve  signs  of  tlie  Zo 
diac.  But  the  Jews  knew  nothing  alxint  the  Ileavcns.  or  they  would  not  have  told  the 
foolish  story  of  the  sun's  Htaiidiii<r  still  ii|K>n  a  bill,  and  the  moon  in  a  valley.  What 
rmilil  they  want  fhe  moon  for  in  the  ilav  lime  * 


420  AGE  OF  REASON. 

in  communion  ceremonies,  Dr.  Moore  of  the  Episcopal 
church,  you  have,  in  order  to  make  yourselves  appear  of 
some  importance,  reduced  General  Hamilton's  character 
to  that  of  a  feeble-minded  man,  who  in  going  out  of  the 
world  wanted  a  passport  from  a  priest.  Which  of  you  was 
first  or  last  applied  to  for  this  purpose  is  a  matter  of  no 
consequence. 

The  man,  sir,  who  puts  his  trust  and  confidence  in 
God,  that  leads  a  just  and  moral  life,  and  endeavors  to 
do  good,  does  not  trouble  himself  about  priests  when  his 
hour  of  departure  comes,  nor  permit  priests  to  trouble 
themselves  about  him.  They  are  in  general  mischievous 
beings  where  character  is  concerned ;  a  consultation  of 
priests  is  worse  than  a  consultation  of  physicians. 

A  Member  of  the  Deistical  Congregation. 


OF  THE  BOOKS  OF  THE   NEW  TESTAMENT. 
Address  to  the  believers  in  the  book  called  the  Scriptures. 


THE  Neu>  Testament  contains  twenty-seven  books, 
of  which  four  are  called  Gospels  ;  one  called  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles ;   fourteen  called  Epistles  of  Paul  ; 
one  of  James  ;  two  of  Peter ;  three  of  John  ;  one  of  Jude  ; 
and  one  called  the  Revelation. 

None  of  those  books  have  the  appearance  of  being 
written  by  the  persons  whose  names  they  bear,  neither  do 
we  know  who  the  authors  were.     They  come  to  us  on  no 
other  authority  than  the  church  of  Rome,   which  the 
Protestant  Priests,   especially  those  of  New   England, 
call   the    Whore  of  Babylon.      This  church   appointed 
sundry  councils  to  be  held,  to  compose  creeds  for  the 
people,  and   to   regulate   church   affairs.      Two  of  the 
principal  of  these  councils  were  that  of  Nice,  and  of 
Laodocia,  (names  of  the  places  where  the  councils  were 
held,)  about  three  hundred  and  fifty  years  after  the  time 
that  Jesus  is  said  to  have  lived.     Before  this  time  there 
was   no  such    book   as   the  New   Testament.     But  the 
church  could  not  well  go  on  without  having  something 
to  show,  as  the  Persians  showed  the  Zendavista — revealed, 
they  say,  by  God  to  Zoroaster;  the  Braminsof  India,  the 
Shaster — revealed,  the>^  say,  by  God  to  Brama — and  given 
to  him  out  of  a  dusky  cloud  ;   the  Jews,  the  books  the) 
call  the  Law  of  Moses  —  given  they  say  also  out  of  a  cloud 
on  Mount  Sinai ;   the  church  set  about  forming  a  code 


422  AGE   OF    REASON. 

for  itself  out  of  such  materials  as  it  could  find  or  pick  up. 
But  where  they  got  those  materials,  in  what  language 
they  were  written,  or  whose  hand  writing  they  were, 
or  whether  they  were  originals  or  copies,  or  on  what 
authority  they  stood  we  know  nothing  of,  nor  does  the 
New  Testament  tell  us.  The  church  was  resolved  to 
have  a  New  Testament^  and  as  after  the  lapse  of  more 
than  three  hundred  years,  no  hand-writing  could  be 
proved  or  disproved,  the  church,  who  like  former  im- 
postors, had  then  gotten  possession  of  the  state,  had 
every  thing  its  own  way.  It  invented  creeds,  such  as 
that  called  the  Apostle's  Creed,  the  Nicean  Creed  the 
Athanasian  Creed,  and  out  of  the  loads  of  rubbish  that 
were  presented,  it  voted  four  to  be  Gospels,  and  others 
to  be  Epistles,  as  we  now  find  them  arranged. 

Of  those  called  Gospels,  above  forty  were  presented, 
each  pretending  to  be  genuine.  Four  only  were  voted 
in,  and  entitled,  the  Gospel  according  to  St.  Matthew — 
the  Gospel  according  to  St.  Mark  —  the  Gospel  according 
to  St.  Luke — the  Gospel  according  to  St.  John. 

This  word  according^  shows  that  those  books  have  not 
been  written  by  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and  John,  but 
according  to  some  accounts  or  traditions,  picked  up  con- 
cerning them.  The  word  according  means  agreeing 
with,  and  necessarily  includes  the  idea  of  two  things,  or 
two  persons.  We  cannot  say,  The  Gospel  written  by 
Matthew  according  to  Matthew ;  but  we  might  say,  the 
Gospel  of  some  other  person  according  to  what  was 
reported  to  have  been  the  opinion  of  Matthew.  Now  we 
do  not  know  who  those  other  persons  were,  nor  whether 
what  they  wrote  accorded  with  any  thing  that  Matthew, 
Mark,  Luke  and  John  might  have  said.  There  is  too 
little  evidence,  and  too  much  contrivance,  about  those 
books  to  merit  credit. 

The  next  book  after  those  called  Gospels,  is  that  called 
the   Acts  of  the    Apostles.     This  book  is  anonymous ; 


AGE  OF   REASON.  423 

neither  do  the  councils  that  compiled  or  contrived  the 
New  Testament  tell  us  how  they  came  by  it  The 
church,  to  supply  this  defect,  says  it  was  written  by  Luke, 
which  shows  that  the  church  and  its  priests  have  not 
compared  that  called  the  Gospel  according  to  St.  Luke, 
and  the  Acts  together,  for  the  two  contradict  each  other. 
The  book  of  Luke,  chap.  24,  makes  Jesus  ascend  into 
heaven  the  very  same  day  that  it  makes  him  rise  from 
the  grave.  The  book  of  Acts,  chap.  i.  v.  3,  says,  that 
he  remained  on  the  earth  forty  days  after  his  crucifixion. 
There  is  no  believing  what  either  of  them  says. 

The  next  to  the  book  of  Acts  is  that  entitled  '*The 
Epistle  of  Paul  the  Apostle*  to  the  Romans. "  This  is 
not  an  Epistle,  or  letter,  written  by  Paul  or  signed  by 
him.  It  is  an  Epistle,  or  letter,  written  by  a  person  who 
signs  himself  Tertius,  and  sent,  as  it  is  said  at  the  end 
by  a  servant  woman  called  Phebe.  The  last  chapter,  ver. 
22,  says.  "I  Tertitus,  who  wrote  this  Epistle,  salute 
you."  Who  Tertius  or  Phebe  were,  we  know  nothing 
of.  The  Epistle  is  not  dated.  The  whole  of  it  is 
■written  in  the  first  person,  and  that  person  is  Tertitus, 
not  Paul.  But  it  suited  the  church  to  ascribe  it  to  Paul. 
There  is  nothing  in  it  that  is  interesting  except  it  be  to 
contending  and  wrangling  sectaries.  The  stupid  meta- 
phor of  the  potter  and  the  clay  is  in  the  9th  chapter. 

The  next  book  is  entitled  "The  first  Epistle  of  Paul 
the  Apostle,  to  the  Corindiians."  This,  like  the  former, 
i3  not  an  Epistle  written  by  Paul,  nor  signed  by  him. 
The  conclusion  of  the  Epistle  says,  *'The  first  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians  was  written  from  Philippi,  by  Stephanas 
and  Fortunatus,  and  Achaicus  and  Timotheus."  The 
second  Epistle  entitled,  "The  second  Epistle  of  Paul  the 

*  According  to  the  criterion  uf  the  church,  Paul  wat>  nut  an  apoHtle ;  that  appellation 
beinft  given  only  to  tho«4e  called  the  twelve,  Two  Bailors  belonging  to  a  man  of  war,  pot 
into  a  dispute  npon  this  point,  whether  Paul  wai>  an  apostle  or  not,  and  they  agreed  to 
refer  it  to  the  boatowain,  who  decided  very  camtiiically  that  Paul  wa»  an  acting  apoetle 
■bnt  not  ratea. 


424  AGE  OF   REASON. 

Apostle,  to  the  Corinthians,"  is  in  the  same  case  with  the 
first.  The  conclusion  of  it  says,  "It  was  written  from 
Philippi,  a  city  of  Macedonia,  by  Titus  and  Lucas. 

A  question  may  arise  upon  these  cases,  which  is,  are 
these  persons  the  writers  of  the  epistles  originally,  or  are 
they  the  writers  and  attestors  of  copies  sent  to  the 
councils  who  compiled  the  code  or  canon  of  the  New- 
Testament?  If  the  epistles  had  been  dated  this  question 
could  be  decided  ;  but  in  either  of  the  cases  the  evidences 
of  Paul's  hand- writing  and  of  their  being  written  by  him 
is  wanting,  and,  therefore,  there  is  no  authority  for  call- 
ing them  Epistles  of  Paul.  We  know  not  whose  Epistles 
they  were,  nor  whether  they  are  genuine  or  forged. 

The  next  is  entitled,  ' '  The  Epistle  of  Paul  the  Apostle 
to  the  Galatians. "     It  contains  six  short  chapters.     But 
short  as  the  epistle  is,  it  does  not  carry  the  appearance 
of  being  tl.e  work  or  composition  of  one  person.     The 
fifth  chapter,  ver.  2,  says,  "  If  ye  be  circumcised,  Christ 
sliall  avail  you  nothing."     It  does  not  say  circumcision 
siiall   profit  you  nothing,   but  Christ   shall   profit   you 
nothing.      Yet  in  the  sixth  chap.,  v.  15,  it  says,  "For  in 
Christ  Jesus  neither  circumcision  availeth  any  thing  nor 
uncircumcision,   but  a  new  creature."      These  are  not 
reconcilable  passages,  nor  can  contrivance  make  them 
so.     The  conclusion  of  the  Epistle  says,  it  was  written 
from  Rome,  but  it  is  not  dated,  nor  is  there  any  signature 
to  it,  neither  do  the  compilers  of  the  New  Testament  s^c^ 
how  they  came  by  it.     We  are  in  the  dark  upon  all 
these  matters. 

The  next  is  entitled,  "The  Epistle  of  Paul  the  Apostle 
to  the  Ephesians."  Paul  is  not  the  writer.  The  con- 
clusion of  it  says,  "Written  from  Rome  unto  the  Ephes- 
ians by  Tychicus." 

The  next  is  entitled,  "The  Epistle  of  Paul  the  Apostle 
to  the  Philippians. "  Paul  is  not  the  writer.  The  con- 
clusion of  it  says,  "It  was  written  to  the  Philippians. 


AGE  OF   REASON.  425 

from  Rome  by  Epaphroditus."  It  is  not  dated.  Query, 
Were  those  men  who  wrote  and  signed  those  Epistles 
journeymen  Apostles,  who  undertook  to  write  in  Paul's 
name,  as  Paul  is  said  to  have  preached  in  Christ's  name? 

The  next  is  entitled,  "The  Epistle  of  Paul  the  Apostle 
to  the  Colossians."  Paul  is  not  the  writer.  Doctor  Luke 
is  spoken  of  in  this  Epistle  as  sending  his  compliments. 
"Luke,  the  beloved  physician,  and  Denias  greet  you." 
Chap,  iv.,  ver.  14.  It  does  not  say  a  word  about  his 
writing  any  Gospel.  The  conclusion  of  the  Epistle  says, 
"Written  from  Rome  to  the  Collossians  by  Tychicus 
and  Onesimus." 

The  next  is  entitled,  "The  first  and  the  second  Epistles 
of  Paul  the  Apostle,  to  the  Thessalonians. "  Either  the 
writer  of  these  Epistles  was  a  visionary  enthusiast,  or  a 
direct  impostor,  for  he  tells  the  Thessalonians,  and,  he 
says  he  tells  them  by  the  word  of  the  Lord,  that  the 
world  will  be  at  an  end  in  his  and  their  time ;  and  after 
telling  them  that  those  who  are  already  dead  shall  rise, 
he  adds,  chapter  4,  verse  17,  "Then  we  which  are  alive 
and  remain  shall  be  caught  up  with  them  into  the  clouds 
to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air,  and  so  shall  we  be  ever  with 
the  Lord."  Such  detected  lies  as  these,  ought  to  fill 
priests  with  confusion,  when  they  preach  such  books  to 
be  the  word  of  God.  These  two  Epistles  are  said  in  the 
conclusion  of  them,  to  be  written  from  Athens.  They 
are  without  dates  or  signatures. 

The  next  four  Epistles  are  private  letters.  Two  of 
them  are  to  Timothy,  one  to  Titus  and  one  to  Philemon. 
Who  they  were,  nobody  knows. 

The  first  to  Timothy,  is  said  to  be  written  from 
Laodicea.  It  is  without  date  or  signature.  The  second 
to  Timothy,  is  said  to  be  written  from  Rome,  and  is 
without  date  or  signature.  The  Epistle  to  Titus  is  said 
to  be  written  from  Nicopolis  in  Macedonia.  It  is  with- 
out  date   or   signature.       The    Epistle  to  Philemon    is 


426  AGE   OF   REASON, 

said  to  be  written  from  Rome  by  Onesimus.  It  is  with- 
out date. 

The  last  Epistle  ascribed  to  Paul  is  entitled,  "The 
Epistle  of  Paul  the  Apostle  to  the  Hebrews, ' '  and  is  said 
in  the  conclusion  to  be  written  from  Italy,  by  Timothy. 
This  Timothy  (according  to  the  conclusion  of  the  Epistle 
called  the  second  Epistle  of  Paul  to  Timothy)  was  bishop 
of  the  church  of  the  Ephesians,  and  consequently  this  is 
not  an  Epistle  of  Paul. 

On  what  slender  cob- web  evidence,  do  the  priests  and 
professors  of  the  Christian  religion  hang  their  faith  ! 
The  same  degree  of  hearsay  evidence,  and  that  at  third 
and  fourth  hand,  would  not,  in  a  court  of  Justice,  give  a 
man  title  to  a  cottage,  and  yet  the  priests  of  this  profes- 
sion presumptuously  promise  their  deluded  followers  the 
kingdom  of  Heaven.  A  little  reflection  would  teach  men 
that  those  books  are  not  to  be  trusted  to ;  that  so  far 
from  there  being  any  proof  they  are  the  word  of  God,  it 
is  unknown  who  the  writers  of  them  were,  or  at  what 
time  they  were  written,  within  three  hundred  years  after 
the  reputed  authors  are  said  to  have  lived.  It  is  not 
the  interest  of  priests,  who  get  their  living  by  them,  to 
examine  into  the  sufficiency  of  the  evidence  upon  which 
those  books  were  received  by  the  popish  councils  who 
compiled  the  New  Testament. 

The  cry  of  the  priests  that  the  church  is  in  danger,  is 
the  cry  of  men  who  do  not  understand  the  interest  of 
their  own  craft,  for  instead  of  exciting  alarms  and 
apprehensions  for  its  safety,  as  they  expect,  it  excites 
suspicion  that  the  foundation  is  not  sound,  and  that  it  is 
necessary  to  take  down  and  build  it  on  a  sure  foundation. 
Nobody  fears  for  the  safety  of  a  mountain,  but  a  hillock 
of  sand  may  be  washed  away  !  Blow  then,  O  ye  priests, 
"the  Trumpet  in  Zion,"  for  the  Hillock  is  in  danger. 

Detector  —  P. 


ON  DEISM,  AND  THE  WRITINGS  OF 
THOMAS  PAINE. 


THE  following  reflections,  when  written,  were  occa- 
sioned by  certain  expressions  in  some  of  the  public 
papers  against  Deism  and  the  writings  of  Thomas 
Paine  on  that  subject. 

''''Great  is  Diana  of  the  Ephesians^'''  was  the  cry  of  the 
people  of  Ephesus  ;*  and  the  cry  of  'Wr  holy  religion^'''' 
has  been  the  cry  of  superstition  in  some  instances,  and 
of  hypocrisy  in  others,  from  that  day  to  this. 

The  Brahmin,  the  follower  of  Zoroaster,  the  Jew,  the 
Mahometan,  the  church  of  Rome,  the  Greek  church,  the 
Protestant  church,  split  into  several  hundred  contradic- 
tory sectaries,  preaching,  in  some  instances,  damnation 
against  each  other,  all  cry  out,  ''''our  holy  religion.^'' 
The  Calvinist,  who  damns  children  of  a  span  long  to  hell 
to  bum  for  ever  for  the  glory  of  God,  (and  this  is  called 
Christianity,)  and  the  Universalist,  who  preaches  that 
all  shall  be  saved  and  none  shall  be  damned,  (and  this 
also  is  called  Christianity,)  boast  alike  of  their  holy 
religion  and  their  Christian  faith.  Something  more, 
therefore,  is  necessary  than  mere  cry  and  wholesale  asser- 
tion, and  that  something  is  Truth  ;  and  as  inquiry  is 
the  road  to  truth,  he  that  is  opposed  to  inquiry  is  not  a 
friend  to  truth. 

•  Acte,  chap,  xix,  ver.  88, 


428  AGE  OF  REASON. 

The  God  of  Truth  is  not  the  God  of  fable ;  when, 
therefore,  any  book  is  introduced  into  the  world  as  the 
word  of  God,  and  made  a  ground-work  for  religion,  it 
ought  to  be  scrutinized  more  than  other  books  to  see  if 
it  bear  evidence  of  being  what  it  is  called.  Our  reverence 
to  God  demands  that  we  do  this,  lest  we  ascribe  to  God 
what  is  not  his,  and  our  duty  to  ourselves  demand  it,  lest 
we  take  fable  for  fact,  and  rest  our  hope  of  salvation  on 
a  false  foundation.  It  is  not  our  calling  a  book  holy  that 
makes  it  so,  any  more  than  our  calling  a  religion  holy 
that  entitles  it  to  the  name.  Inquir>',  therefore,  is 
necessary  in  order  to  arrive  at  truth.  But  inquiry  must 
have  some  principle  to  proceed  on,  some  standard  to 
judge  by,  superior  to  human  authority. 

When  we  survey  the  works  of  creation,  the  revolutions 
of  the  planetary  system,  and  the  whole  economy  of 
what  is  called  nature,  which  is  no  other  than  the  laws 
the  Creator  has  prescribed  to  matter,  we  see  unerring 
order  and  universal  harmony  leigning  throughout  the 
whole.  No  one  part  contradicts  another.  The  sun  does 
not  run  against  the  moon,  nor  the  moon  against  the  sun, 
nor  the  planets  against  each  other.  Every  thing  keeps 
its  appointed  time  and  place.  This  harmony  in  the 
works  of  God  is  so  obvious,  that  the  farmer  of  the  field,, 
though  he  cannot  calculate  eclipses,  is  as  sensible  of  it 
as  the  philosophical  astronomer.  He  sees  the  God  of 
order  in  every  part  of  the  visible  universe. 

Here,  then,  is  the  standard  to  which  every  thing  must 
be  brought  that  pretends  to  be  the  word  of  God,  and  by 
this  standard  it  must  be  judged,  independently  of  any 
thing  and  every  thing  that  man  can  say  or  do.  His 
opinion  is  like  a  feather  in  the  scale  compared  with  the 
standard  that  God  himself  has  set  up. 

It  is  therefore,  by  this  standard,  that  the  Bible,  and 
all  other  books  pretending  to  be  the  word  of  God,  (and 
there  are  many  of  them  in  the  world,)  must  be  judged^ 


AGE  OF    REASON.  429 

and  not  by  the  opinions  of  men  or  the  decrees  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal councils.  These  have  been  so  contradictory,  that  they 
have  often  rejected  in  one  council  what  they  had  voted  to 
be  the  word  of  God  in  another;  and  admitted  what  had 
been  before  rejected.  In  this  state  of  uncertainty  in 
which  we  are,  and  which  is  rendered  still  more  uncertain 
by  the  numerous  contradictory  sectaries  that  have  spnmg 
up  since  the  time  of  Luther  and  Calvin,  what  is  man  to 
<Jo?  The  answer  is  easy.  Begin  at  the  root — begin 
with  the  Bible  itself  Examine  it  with  the  utmost 
stiictness.  It  is  our  duty  so  to  do.  Compare  the  parts 
with  each  other,  and  the  whole  with  the  harmonious, 
magnificent  order  that  reigns  throughout  the  visible 
universe,  and  the  result  will  be,  that  if  the  same  almighty 
wisdom  that  created  the  universe,  dictated  also  the  Bible, 
the  Bible  will  be  as  harmonious  and  as  magnificent  in 
all  its  parts,  and  in  the  whole,  as  the  universe  is.  But  if, 
instead  of  this,  the  parts  are  found  to  be  discordant,  con- 
tradicting in  one  place  what  is  said  in  another,  (as  in  2nd 
Sam.,  chap,  xxiv.,  ver.  i,  and  istChron.,  chap,  xxi.,  ver. 
I,  where  the  same  action  is  ascribed  to  God  in  one  book 
and  to  Satan  in  the  other,)  abounding  also  in  idle  and 
obscene  stories,  and  representing  the  Almighty  as  a 
passionate,  whimsical  Being,  continually  changing  his 
mind,  making  and  unmaking  his  own  works  as  if  he  did 
not  know  what  he  was  about,  we  may  take  it  for  certainty 
that  the  Creator  of  the  universe  is  not  the  author  of  such 
a  book,  that  it  is  not  the  word  of  God,  and  that  to  call  it 
so  is  to  dishonor  his  name.  The  Quakers,  who  are  a 
people  more  moral  and  regular  in  their  conduct  than  the 
people  of  other  sectaries,  and  generally  allowed  so  to  be, 
do  not  hold  the  Bible  to  be  the  word  of  God.  They  call 
it  a  history  of  the  times^  and  a  bad  history  it  is,  and  also 
a  history  of  bad  men  and  of  bad  actions,  and  abounding 
with  bad  examples. 

For  several  centuries  past  the  dispute  has  been  about 


430  AGE   OF   REASON. 

doctrines.  It  is  now  about  fact.  Is  the  Bible  the  word 
of  God,  or  is  it  not?  for  until  this  point  is  established, 
no  doctrine  drawn  from  the  Bible  can  afford  real  consola- 
tion to  man,  and  he  ought  to  be  careful  he  does  not 
mistake  delusion  for  truth.  This  is  a  case  that  concerns 
all  men  alike. 

There  has  always  existed  in  Europe,  and  also  in 
America,  since  its  establishment,  a  numerous  descrip- 
tion of  men,  (I  do  not  here  mean  the  Quakers,)  who  did 
not,  and  do  not  believe  the  Bible  to  be  the  word  of  God. 
These  men  never  formed  themselves  into  an  established 
society,  but  are  to  be  found  in  all  the  sectaries  that 
exist,  and  are  more  numerous  than  any,  perhaps  equal 
to  all,  and  are  daily  increasing.  From  Deus,  the  Latin 
word  for  God,  they  have  been  denominated  Deists^  that 
is,  believers  in  God.  It  is  the  most  honorable  appellation 
that  can  be  given  to  man,  because  it  is  derived  imme- 
diately from  the  Deity.  It  is  not  an  artificial  name  like 
Episcopalian,  Presbyterian,  &c.,  but  is  a  name  of  sacred 
signification,  and  to  revile  it  is  to  revile  the  name 
of  God. 

Since  then  there  is  so  much  doubt  and  uncertainty 
about  the  Bible,  some  asserting,  and  others  denying  it  to 
be  the  word  of  God,  it  is  best  that  the  whole  matter  come 
out.  It  is  necessary,  for  the  information  of  the  world, 
that  it  should.  A  better  time  cannot  offer  than  whilst 
the  government,  patronizing  no  one  sect  or  opinion  in 
preference  to  another,  protects  equally  the  rights  of  all  ; 
and  certainly  every  man  must  spurn  the  idea  of  an 
ecclesiastical  tyranny,  engrossing  the  rights  of  the  press, 
and  holding  it  free  only  for  itself. 

Whilst  the  terrors  of  the  church,  and  the  tyranny  of 
the  state,  hung  like  a  pointed  sword  over  Europe,  men 
were  commanded  to  believe  what  the  church  told  them, 
or  go  to  the  stake.  All  inquiries  into  the  authenticitv 
of  the  Bible  were  shut  out  by  the  inquisition.    We  ought. 


AGE   OF    REASON.  43 1 

therefore,  to  suspect,  that  a  great  mass  of  information 
respecting  the  Bible,  and  the  introduction  of  it  into  the 
world,  has  been  suppressed  by  the  united  tyranny  of 
church  and  state,  for  the  purpose  of  keeping  people  in 
ignorance,  and  which  ought  to  be  known. 

The  Bible  has  been  received  by  the  Protestants  on  the 
authority  of  the  church  of  Rome,  and  on  no  other 
authority.  It  is  she  that  has  said  it  is  the  word  of  God. 
We  do  not  admit  the  authority  of  that  church  with 
respect  to  its  pretended  infallibility^  its  manufactured 
miracles,  its  setting  itself  up  to  forgive  sins,  its  amphi- 
bious doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  &c. ;  and  we  ought 
to  be  watchful  with  respect  to  any  book  introduced  by 
her,  or  her  Ecclesiastical  Councils,  and  called  by  her  the 
word  of  God  :  and  the  more  so,  because  it  was  by  propa- 
gating that  belief  and  supporting  it  by  fire  and  fagot, 
that  she  kept  up  her  temporal  power.  That  the  belief 
of  the  Bible  does  no  good  in  the  world,  may  be  seen  by 
the  irregular  lives  of  those,  as  well  priests  as  laymen, 
who  profess  to  believe  it  to  be  the  word  of  God,  and 
the  moral  lives  of  the  Quakers  who  do  not.  It  abounds 
with  too  many  ill  examples  to  be  made  a  rule  for  moral 
life,  and  were  a  man  to  copy  after  the  lives  of  some  of 
its  most  celebrated  characters,  he  would  come  to  the 
gallows. 

Thomas  Paine  has  written  to  show  that  the  Bible  is 
not  the  word  of  God,  that  the  books  it  contains  were  not 
written  by  the  person  to  whom  they  are  ascribed,  that  it 
is  an  anonymous  book,  and  that  we  have  no  authority 
for  calling  it  the  word  of  God,  or  for  saying  it  was 
written  by  inspired  penmen,  since  we  do  not  know  who 
the  writers  were.  This  is  the  opinion  not  only  of 
Thomas  Paine,  but  of  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands 
of  the  most  respectable  characters  in  the  United  States 
and  in  Europe.  These  men  have  the  same  right  to  their 
opinions  as  others  have  to  contrary  opinions,  and  the 


432  AGE  OF   REASON. 

same  right  to  publish  them.     Ecclesiastical  tyranny  is 
not  admissible  in  the  United  States. 

With  respect  to  morality,  the  writings  of  Thomas 
Paine  are  remarkable  for  purity  and  benevolence ;  and 
though  he  often  enlivens  them  with  touches  of  wit  and 
humor,  he  never  loses  sight  of  the  real  solemnity  of  his 
subject.  No  man's  morals,  either  with  respect  to  his 
Maker,  himself,  or  his  neighbor,  can  suffer  by  the 
writings  of  Thomas  Paine. 

It  is  now  too  late  to  abuse  Deism,  especially  in  a 
country  where  the  press  is  free,  or  where  ft'ee  presses  can 
be  established.  It  is  a  religion  that  has  God  for  its  patron 
and  derives  its  name  from  him.  The  thoughtful  mind 
of  man,  wearied  with  the  endless  contentions  of  sectaries 
against  sectaries,  doctrines  against  doctrines,  and  priests 
against  priests,  finds  its  repose  at  last  in  the  contemplative 
belief  and  worship  of  one  God  and  the  practice  of  morality, 
for  as  Pope  wisely  says, 

'•  He  can't  be  wrong  whose  life  is  in  the  right." 


uc 

! 


II 


000  764  948     6 


